Mission Statement and Introduction: SINGLE TRANSACTION

“You have a choice — to keep it or lose it — I want you to know.”

Thomas Jefferson (Letter to James Monroe January 1, 1815)

[Editor’s Note: While I agree this statement, it goes too far. It is centralization of banking, and the power that goes with it, that is the danger to us. Centralization removes the personal relationship from banking, and removes personal responsibility for both loans and deposits from both the financial institution and its customers. Thus character, the one thing that JP Morgan said was the the essence of every banking transaction, was shunted aside in favor of intoxicating excess. We don’t need big banks to provide the convenience or benefits of interstate or even international banking. The technology is already in place to allow the 5,000 banks and credit unions that are NOT in trouble, to accept deposits for any bank from anywhere, to provide surcharge free access to ATM services, loans, billpay, ACH or other services. The only thing stopping free market forces from governing the marketplace is that the referee is owned by the bullies in the playground. The bullies who broke all the rules won’t allow access to the thousands of banks who practiced sound judgment and good management of risk. It is only the appearance of competition that has been established. It is an illusion.]

“If the American People ever allow the banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers occupied. The issuing power of money should be taken from the bankers and restored to Congress and the people to whom it belongs. I sincerely believe the banking institutions

We are completely saddled and bridled, and the bank is so firmly mounted on us that we must go where they ill guide.
having the issuing power of money are more dangerous to liberty than standing armies. The dominion which the banking institutions have obtained over the minds of our citizens…must be broken, or it will break us.”

It’s War! The Homeowner’s War. YOU have rights, powerful rights to keep YOUR homes, “foreclose” on your “lender”, collect damages, refunds, rebates, interest, attorneys fees and court costs. Homeowners for once are in the catbird seat of going after the windfall that always seems to hit the big guys. This time it is YOUR turn.

This is a developing resource for attorneys and borrowers to assist them in creating strategies and tactics in foreclosure defense and offense. Assistance and comments regarding bankruptcy jurisdiction is also covered.

Bottom Line: The procedure invoked by the mortgage meltdown scheme defrauded investors and borrowers in identical fashion as part of a single scheme (false ratings and insurance) in asset backed derivative securities, who were the source of funding for the fraudulent loans on residential real property (false appraisals, undisclosed parties, undisclosed fees, abandonment of underwriting standards etc.). The borrower and the investor were co-victims of a Ponze scheme. The middlemen needed money from the investor and a signature from the borrower. Everything else was smoke and mirrors.

We are finding that the notice of sale or filing of foreclosure starts with the wrong people using information that cannot be verified based upon authorization that is assumed rather than provable. we also find that there are good legal grounds for challenging any loan, whether in default or not, that was originated between 2001-2008, and in particular any such transaction in which the borrower is now “upside down” (negative equity, despite the down payment of as much as 20%-35%).

The central theme here is a SINGLE TRANSACTION consisting of many new players in the mortgage loan transaction, new roles for old players, and shifting of the risk of loss, right to receive payment, ownership of the note and ownership of the security instrument, all of which are usually vested in different entities or individuals, trustees, or divisions of had been conventional lending institutions and investment banking institutions.

In a great many cases, if not the majority of cases, we find that the “lender”, while possessing all the attributes of a bank or Lending Institution is actually a mortgage broker or front for an investment banking firm.

A summary of the starts with the source of funds (an investor in an asset backed security -ABS) who buys a share of an entity that possesses certain rights by assignment and certain guarantees by indemnification and indenture. This entity, like all capitalist structures is broken up into smaller shares that investors buy.

The shares are sold to qualified investors through an exemption in SEC laws that allows limited disclosure and virtually no prospectus. The investors appear to have most of the rights to the stream of revenue generated by borrower payments along with guarantees, indemnifications and sue of proceeds allowances from the investment banker, the lender, or other third party insurer or guarantor. Thus the total revenue to the investor is partially from his own funds, partially from third parties and the rest from the payments made by the various borrowers whose mortgages and notes are the center piece of the overall transaction.

The shares are rated by conventional rating agencies who were corrupted by the mortgage meltdown scheme and the flow of funds is insured by one of a variety of insurers of revenue, default risk etc.

The securitized entity appears to have the most rights (but apparently not the exclusive rights) to the mortgage notes that make up the portfolio of assets within the securitized entity.

The investment banker that created the entity whose shares were sold to investors appears to have formed subsidiary(ies) or affiliated entities that (a) hold most of the rights to the security instrument (mortgage) and (b) other entities that act as mortgage aggregators, lenders, mortgage brokers etc.

A perusal of the blog site will reveal that our opinion is that in all cases the “lender” should at best be identified as contingent, the mortgage and note should at best be identified as contingent, and that “John Doe” should be added to the list of Defendants and/or schedule of creditors, being the unknown person(s) or entity (ies) that own shares or bonds that are backed by the mortgages and notes of hundreds or thousands of people.

Each party received a fee that could be called a transaction fee arising out of the real estate closing which included the loan closing in which the signature of the borrower on the loan documents on one end, and the signature and funding of the investor in the ABS on the other end.

The point that needs to be made immediately to any sitting Judge is that the foreclosure process has changed from simple to complex litigation by virtue of the fact that securitization of loans introduced many new parties into the transaction, many of whom were not disclosed, each of whom received compensation that was not disclosed, each of whom violated Truth in lending laws, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Acts, and Securities laws and rules, with multiple rights of rescission accruing to the borrower from a variety of applicable laws.

Foreclosure has become far more complex and complicated that it was before the securitization of mortgages and other loans began, and before that financial model spawned a surge of predatory lending practices that changed the landscape of foreclosure litigation.

We have seen several cases around the country where the lender was found to have decoupled the security interest from the note, where the note was satisfied by Truth in Lending violations (TILA), and where the Trustee, Lender and/or mortgage servicer is unable to produce the original note and mortgage, unable to produce the actual assignment of the mortgage and note to a mortgage aggregator and unable to to trace a particular asset backed security that was sold somewhere in the world to dozens, hundreds or thousands of investors to a particular piece of property (in this case — YOUR property).

Look carefully at the Garfield Glossary at entries regarding the holder in due course under the UCC and the details of securitization, clouds on title and strategies to take the offense in the Homeowner’s War.

Our purpose here is to provide a beginning point for lawyers and non-lawyers in their quest to save their property and recover refunds, points, closing expenses, compensatory damages and punitive, exemplary or statutory treble damages. Secondarily we provide information generally on economic data and other stories of interest.

Download Neil Garfield’s memo on single transaction and step transaction doctrine

For over a year, Neil Garfield in Phoenix, Az has been researching, writing and collecting information about homeowners in distress. After correctly predicting the housing crash right down to the last dotted “i” and crossed “t” he began writing his blog http://www.livinglies.wordpress.com. Starting with modest results, the blog took on a life of its own and has enjoyed 20 straight weeks of increasing volume, the latest being 10,000 visits in one week.

His basic premise, set forth in his FAQ and Mission statement is that the foreclosure mess was not a situation where millions of people suddenly appeared needing housing, but where Trillions of dollars were in search of people who could be convinced to sign their names.

But Garfield, a former investment banker and former trial attorney, goes further. He says that homeowners can walk into the courthouse in foreclosure and walk back out having foreclosed on their lender and receiving the title to their home free and clear of the mortgage or note. He turns the windfall argument about how unfair it would be for some people to get their homes for free and uncovers the real windfall — that lenders who have been paid in full and received undisclosed fees, are now foreclosing on property so that they end up with the property, the money, and a deficiency judgment too. It is the ultimate windfall and the misperceptions and ideologies that are in circulation perpetuate the fraud that has been committed on our citizens, our country’s place in the world, the erosion of our economy, and the value of our money.

Garfield is now in the process of giving low-cost seminars to lawyers and homeowners on the basics of defending their property and seeks nothing less than to stop All foreclosures on property financed between 2001-2008, which is when Wall Street stepped into the mortgage market and caused a drop in underwriting standards that can only be understood by people like Garfield, who worked there, who created some of these exotic securities.

He says the rule is simple: if you want to sell a security make it complicated. If you want to buy a security look for something simple. In the complex there is fraud, in the simple there is usually just fundamental cash flow, finance and economics.

Additional Resources

Read: July 2007 LivingLies describes and predicts the meltdown

Read: Lehman web of originators servicers, and depository institutions

Video: What Lawyers Are Saying About Neil Garfield’s Seminars

Video: Truth & Rational Principles Set Us Free: Resistance to being a part of a human livestock management through enslavement (debt) and illusion (freedom) – Make it Real

Video: State Bank Preference and Decentralization: Andrew Jackson Vetoes United States Bank and Survives Override

Support this site and the LivingLies Mission

24 Responses

  1. Can I file a Pro Se Motion in Chapter 13 to ask for an indefinite extension of time for new information discovery of additional facts that will further assure that Wells Fargo should be sanctioned and fined many of which will come to us, the homeowner and assure their legal need to recind a loan purportedly they have claimed to have paid to us, which they never did. Two straw persons were created, one as a lender to a 1992 refi and another to be the beneficiary of an Assignment of DOT which was not a bank, yet years later utilized as an illegal fka of Chase Bank twice. I have discovered much so far, but want to discover more and learn how to foreclose on them. I would also Motion for an Order to disallow liftings of any stays for an indefinite length of time, with regular 60 day hearings to report additional findings. We are Pro se before an excellent Fed. Judge in Chap. 13 which was entered to avoid an illegal sale of our home.

  2. of course the note and the mortgage were “de-coupled”! its called ‘modern money mechanics’ (see federal reserve bank publication of same name, 1961) and thats precisely what the mortgage contract says will happen. that, “the note will be assigned to other parties from time to time w/o notice”. duh! its not that complicated, the problem is these foreclosure lawsuits state no tension. there is not really any ‘debt’ or ‘credit’ in this system, money has simply been issued. these debts are legal tender for all debts, remember?

    just keep in mind there is no such thing as a ‘mortgage payment’. mortgages are granted, assigned, struck, voided… but never paid. oayment is for debts, and the evidence of that debt is the ‘promissory note’. that’s what the mortgage CONTRACT says after all. i challenge anyone to find any accounts, principal, interest, “payments”, schedules etc in a standard mortgage indenture. aint gonna find it, not there! cmon sheeples wake up! someone?

  3. Carol Asbury co-hosts a radio program in Delray Beach Forida on WDJA 1420 AM. You can find her here:


    12-1 PM Property Law Today airs on Saturdays I think. Check the schedule posted on the site.

  4. I have a Quiet Title filed against me in Indiana by my mother (who has been diagnosed with severe dementia). My sister, who made herself POA, is the person behind the suit. What are the plausible legal defenses against this suit. Do you know of any cases that might be helpful for me. Thanks, Jeff


    ‘Vacation of FORECLOSURE’…


    We have a few more WINS due soon… We just had to cut the DEAD-WEIGHT of under-handed attorney’s (plural), we were working with. With that said, WE ARE COCKED, LOCKED and ready to ROCK. The Banks (BOA, USB, ABN, Fannie and MERs + a few more) already know what WE can do because, we’ve done it…

    LET US HELP YOU KEEP YOUR HOME and not dance around in Court for the next 2 years. We do not go for the quick fixes. We go for the BIG WINS.

    We are currently working Cases in:


    NOW, We’re waiting for YOU… 🙂

    …and just so you fine folks know (below is a very precise and well directed JAB at, well… they know who they are):
    (it wasn’t that garbage, 1st time, on the job training, over billing HACK, ‘local’ attorney “who DIDN’T get it” [but was almost FIRED, if we had not only had a week to wait, for the Judge’s Ruling] nor was it the “FILING-recycler scumbag” who, likes to make deals behind others backs a.k.a. “J3## —8-$”… If I get blocked again; I might just spill ALL of the beans… STARTING WITH THE MI, FL, CA + STATE ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSIONS… plural)… (and after that, we just might see, ALL of the the FILING-RECYCLER’s “Multiple State Filings” mysteriously, APPEAR ON THIS SITE AND OTHERS… I do my homework HOMMIE and they could almost label your filings QWR’s. I won’t even mention that, I have spoke to some of your ‘potential’ Clients… the operative word in that last sentence is “potential”. Is there a past-tense for the word “potential”)…

    phwwwww… now that we have that out of the way…

    DID I MENTION THAT, WE HAVE WINS and great *NEW* team of Attorneys.

    Good night and May the Lord bless you, ALL.

    Shoot Dan an email @:


  6. is there any more room for your attorney work shop in Orlando??

  7. Looking for advice in Phoenix. How do I get in touch with Neil? I have e-mailed but no response so wondering if there is a phone number or new e-mail address.
    I cannot find an e-mail address for him on this site.
    Failing that, are there any lawyers who ‘get it’ in Phoenix?

  8. CAROL, tried finding you in Florida. You need to put your e-mail address in the body of your message as well, if you want folks to follow through with email. Are you the very same Carol C Asbury who made donations to the Republican Party or their candidate? 😉


  9. Hi, to everyone. I have been reading many of the comments on this site for a couple of weeks. I am an attorney in South Florida. Lake Worth to be exact. If any one needs any help you can contact me through the email above and I will assist in any foreclosure action.

  10. Hi Connie,
    Is that you call me whenever you have time 786 274 0527 or email at malibubooks@gmail.com

  11. Jim, If by chance your are in trouble with your home mortgage and or facing foreclosure and you have some time left to navigate through this blog I promise you, later you will be praising it if you haven’t already.

  12. You DEFINITELY need a good webmaster/designer! I’m sure there is lots of great info here… I just can’t make heads or tails of it.

  13. A question for Mr. Garfield or someone working closely with him.
    I got a new one for you. I went to the OTS on WAMU and they ignored me. I then formally ask them to produce my original note. This time they did not ignore me they literally cut off all communications with me for months, including trying to get payments from me, no payments for months, no foreclosure no nothing.
    I then sent them a qualified written request, a very detailed one combined with other docs that I got from this site. The day that they got this powerful document they went in and zeroed out my small mortgage. On the transaction history it says “corporate advance adjustments” were they subtracted the balance. It now says principle balance zero.

    Have you ever heard of such a thing?

  14. My question is, if you properly rescend a so called loan, and the lender ignores until the 20 day period is up, what is the very next step or the swiftest move to get the bank to do what the law mandates? Also is there a centralized place to get the proper documents to file, and were do you file them?

  15. Dear Mr. Garfield,

    Can you help or guide us to the appropriate attorney?

    We owned a waterfront lot – the builder introduced to his lender. It was a typical 60-90 day construction time to build. The builder ended up taking 18-months. I wanted to terminate the builder – lender warned they could foreclose. This caused our construction loan to expire a few times. Finally, the loan package we signed-up for was no longer available. However, the lender & builder worked a deal allowing us to settle – “if” the builder completed the house within 30-days “after” settlement. To settle the loan a new appraisal is ordered. The appraisal was based up the house being “completed.” Obviously to settle we also must of the Use & Occupancy Permit per state and local codes. I call for the final inspection and learn our home was “never” inspected – it could not possibly be ready for a final inspection. I notify the lender – Houston we have a problem – OH, that isn’t a problem it was all taken care of… hmm?? I learned a manager in county office signed-off on the inspections. I call that manager to meet him at the property. I then show him the electrical switches with no wiring, fans with no wiring or ductwork, etc, etc… He wasn’t happy. Again, I tell the lender – builder assured them everything would be taken care of….

    The outrageous delays cost us an extra 200k, which will be needed at settlement also – the lender is anxious because as mentioned, our loan package is no longer available – AND – I learned we didn’t qualify for their new programs… So, the lender is anxious to get this behind them – sent them numerous emails and pictures of the house. 30-days after settlement house is not complete – 60-days house still not completed – 90-days – not completed… finally, 7-months after we went to settlement turning the construction loan to a perm loan – we finally move in. However, the house is STILL not completed.

    The house would fail inspection today, if the county were to inspect it. In fact, we cannot sell the house because it does not meet code. We can no longer afford the house because it cost us 200k more than we were planning – and as mentioned, it was NEVER completed.

    The loan was sold to Country-Wide. I find it hard to believe Country-Wide purchased a one Million dollar mortgage note for a house that cannot be sold or “legally” lived in per state and county code – that was based upon an appraisal 1.260-million dollars for a house that was NEVER completed.

    My wife & I have never-not paid our bills – never! We are about to lose everything we own. We were planning to retire here. This was our dream property. I have a 91-thousand dollar estimate, just to “fix” (not finish) “fix” the outrageous mess we were left. I am told the builder would most like file bankruptcy if we attempted to peruse him. The lender was aware of “ALL” the misdeeds of the builder – including misusing 70-90 thousand dollars from our account, which caused the delays for our project, no inspections, and that he never finished the project.

    I might be mistaken, but in my opinion, Country-Wide purchased a piece of paper – that loan could not possibly be based upon the appraisal – the house on the deed is technically unlivable?

    Can you please help us find the right attorney in Maryland? We need representation asap. I have volumes of documentation i.e. emails to lender, builder, pictures, etc. I apologize if this is not the right forum to ask – I didn’t see any email addresses.


  16. Law Offices of
    TIMOTHY McCandless
    15647 Village Dr
    Victorville, Ca 92392
    TEL (760) 733-8885; FAX (909)494-4214

    Lets be careful here I see the set up coming like in the 80’s when FSLIC took over the savings and loans the pre-empted all law and where exempt from all fraud claims. Today the Freddie and Fannie where taken over by the government. Like in the 80’s checkmate

  17. Mark, be careful, in the past 5 years litigating our claims we have encountered a lot fraudsters out there….try to get Neil to refer you to a lawyer that will work with him…don’t try this without getting these people checked out….we have lost our life savings using lawyers from what we thought was a non-profit web sit; the National Association of Consumer Associates; we were screwed by all three of the lawyers from this site so be careful! Tim and Kathleen

  18. I have been contacted by a just formed company in So. California. They are telling me that they are working with a company that sues lenders, and gets them to pay back all the payments that the borrowers have paid in so far, plus all the closing costs paid the borrowers paid. Not all the closing costs, but most of them. They charge $1,000 up front to do the paper work, and the lawyer they use gets 1/3 of everything they recover.
    They sue under section 6 of ??? and TIL laws.
    What do you think about this kind of program?

  19. Lets say there is a TILA violation—do you honestly think you do not have to make any payment to the lender? You are removed from paying anything? That would be an incredibly fantastic remedy…although I am sure Wall Street would be disappointed…

  20. Interesting stuff from this lawyer. From livinglies.wordpress.com:

    “The point that needs to be made immediately to any sitting Judge is that the foreclosure process has changed from simple to complex litigation by virtue of the fact that securitization of loans introduced many new parties into the transaction, many of whom were not disclosed, each of whom received compensation that was not disclosed, each of whom violated Truth in lending laws, Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Acts, and Securities laws and rules, with multiple rights of rescission accruing to the borrower from a variety of applicable laws.”

    What I get out of this is that EACH and EVERY holder of the note *separately* is liable for penalties under TILA–that could times the penalties by tens, even hundreds of entities. WOW!

    This could conceivably wipe out the loan through rescission, minus charges, loan costs and TILA penalties. Right?

  21. if your home has already been lost into foreclosure but you think it was handled incorrectly how do you find a lawyer willing to take it pro-bono or how do you even know if you have a case

  22. You should develop a course on the legal defense available to present in court to ultimately get a foreclosure suit denied and another course for a homeowner to get a rescission of their mortgage based on these premises. I mean attorney by nature want to be careful of liability but you know what they say no guts no glory.

  23. For almost a century the Fed has served as the lender of last resort, ending
    the era in which bankers were punished by the free market for lack of banking
    virtues — honesty, forthrightness, prudence, diligence and objectivity. The
    experiment in regulation and central planning has failed miserably, bringing us
    no long-term price stability and the boom and bust cycle, and substituting
    massive system failures in place of occasional regional bank failures. Worse, by
    preempting the market development of banking virtues, which the shadow bank
    system sorely needed, the Federal Reserve System was itself the moral hazard
    that was responsible for risky behavior by those too large to fail in an
    environment in which honesty, forthrightness, prudence, diligence and
    objectivity had become not only irrelevant, but unknown. We now face a tsunami
    measured in quadrillions of dollars. As Justice McReynolds said in 1935, “Loss
    of reputation for honorable dealing will bring us unending humiliation; the
    impending legal and moral chaos is appalling.”

  24. We’re looking for books for legal professionals on various topics, including one on legal strategies to stop forelosures. I couldn’t find any other way to contact you.

    Also perhaps looking for a lecturer on this topic.

    Also, how can I see what your own books look like?

    – Morgan King

Contribute to the discussion!

%d bloggers like this: