MERS instructing members to not foreclose in name of MERS


MERS instructing members to not foreclose in name of MERS (Bulletin 2 Pages at Bottom).

MERSCORP, Inc. Parent (VA) & subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (DE)
Welcome to MERS!

MERS is an innovative process that simplifies the way mortgage ownership and servicing rights are originated, sold and tracked. Created by the real estate finance industry, MERS eliminates the need to prepare and record assignments when trading residential and commercial mortgage loans.

MERS MEMBERS (A-Z) and/or 1st 7 Digits MIN#

America’s Servicing Company
2701 Wells Fargo Way
MAC x9998-012
Minneapolis MN 55467-8000
Theresa Russell
Member Org ID: 1002856

What about GMAC Bank (TRUSTEE)
3451 Hammond Ave, Waterloo, IA 50702
MERS ID: 1005726
Line of Business: Investor
YES with eRegistry and eDelivery

What about GMAC Mortgage of Iowa
dba GMAC Mortgage, LLC
dba (fictitious name in PA)
dba GMAC Bank (fictitious name in PA)
MERS ID: 1000375
Lines of Business: Originator, Servicer, Subservicer, Investor, Document Custodian
YES with eRegistry and eDelivery

GMAC 1992/1993 part of Wells Fargo & Co/MN
c/o Tax Dept,
GMAC Mortgage, PO Box 85071, San Diego CA (formerly Norwest Corporation)
dba Wells Fargo Bank NA.
3451 Hammond Ave
Waterloo, IA
‘eRegistry Participant’ YES
‘eDelivery Participant’ YES

MERS Org ID: 1005727
Lines of Business: Investor
NO Wiithout eRegistry eDelivery.


How does a consumer know if they are dealing with the Wells Fargo Bank NA GMAC or not?
MERS President and CEO R.K. Arnold Appears Before U.S. Senate

Washington, D.C., Nov. 16—R.K. Arnold, president and CEO of MERSCORP, Inc., testified today before the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. To download a copy of his testimony, please click here. For questions, please contact Karmela Lejarde at 703-761-1274.

1 MERSCORP, Inc. is structured as a privately held stock company. Its principal owners are the Mortgage Bankers Association, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, Chase, HSBC, CitiMortgage, GMAC, American Land Title Association, and Wells Fargo. MERS is headquartered in Reston VA.

2 Members tend to register only loans they plan to sell. Wells Fargo and JP Morgan Chase are the principal members in this regard. They service most of the loans they originate themselves, so registering their retail business on the MERS® System is of less practical value to them. However, when these institutions purchase loans from others, known as their correspondent business, they do require that those loans be registered on the MERS® System.

3 MERS makes its money through an annual membership fee (ranging from $264 to $7,500) based on organizational size, and through loan registration and servicing transfer fees. MERS charges a one-time $6.95 fee to register a loan and have Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. serve as the common agent (mortgagee) in the land records. For loans where Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. will not act as the mortgagee, there is only a small one-time registration fee ($0.97). This is known as an iRegistration. Transactional fees (ranging from $1.00 to $7.95) are charged to update the database when servicing rights on the loan are sold from one member to another.

4 The originating lender may be the servicer in some cases.

5 A copy of a sample mortgage document can be found in Attachment One. A short summary of MERS prepared by the Mortgage Bankers Association can be found in Attachment Two.

6 This action tells the world that there is a lien against the property. This is done to protect the lender’s interest. The recording of the mortgage puts future purchasers on notice of any outstanding claims against the property.

7 The promissory note is not (and never has been) recorded or stored with the county land records office. The note is a negotiable instrument that can be bought and sold by endorsement and delivery from the seller to the note purchaser. This activity is governed in all fifty states by the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) Article 3.

8 The MERS® System is the database; MERSCORP, Inc is the operating company that owns the database; and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc (“MERS”) a subsidiary of MERSCORP, Inc., which serves as mortgagee in the land records for loans registered on the MERS® System. For discussion purposes, “MERS” may be used in this testimony to refer to all three entities unless specifically stated otherwise.

9 The design of the MERS® System always anticipated and required that borrowers would be able to access the system to determine the servicer of their loans. Providing such information to MERS is a requirement of membership and loan registration.

When Congress acted last year to require that borrowers be told when their note is sold and the identity of the new note-owner,

MERS established, within a matter of weeks, a new service called Investor ID. Of the 3,000 members of MERS, 97% agreed to disclose the identity of the note-owner through the MERS® System. Fannie Mae opted to be disclosed. Freddie Mac chose not
to be disclosed.

10 The issue of whether transfers of residential mortgage loans made in connection with securitizations are sufficient to transfer title and foreclosure rights is the subject of a “View Point” article entitled “Title Transfer Law 101” by Karen Gelernt that appeared in the October 19, 2010 edition of the American Banker. A copy can be found in Attachment Three.

11 A 1993, 36-page white paper entitled “Whole Loan Book Entry Concept for the Mortgage Finance Industry” addresses the concepts underlying MERS and the problems it was designed to address. It is available upon request.

12 The essential elements of the legal principles underlying MERS can be found in “MERS Under Attack: Perspective on Recent Decisions from Kansas and Minnesota,” an article by Barkley and Barbara Clark in the February 2010 edition of Clark’s Secured Transactions Monthly. A copy of this article can be found in Attachment Four.

13 On loans originated by correspondent lenders or brokers (where MERS is not the mortgagee), the costs of preparing assignments and the associated filing fees are listed on the HUD-1 and paid directly by the borrower.

14 Individual states handle real estate foreclosures differently. In some states the foreclosure process is judicial, and in some states it is non-judicial. Under both systems, time frames and terms vary widely from state to state. A brief, general, description of both processes prepared by the Mortgage Bankers Association can be found in Attachment Five.

15 Some important recent cases upholding the rights of MERS include:

16 A review of the use of MERS in all fifty states was done by Covington and Burling in 1996 and 1997 as part of the due diligence associated with the creation of MERS. It is available upon request.

Read: MERS President and CEO R.K.Arnold Appears Before Senate:
MERS President and CEO R.K. Arnold Appears Before U.S. Senate

Washington, D.C., Nov. 16—R.K. Arnold, president and CEO of MERSCORP, Inc., testified today before the United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs. To download a copy of his testimony, please click here. For questions, please contact Karmela Lejarde at 703-761-1274.


The right of petition is expressly set out in the First Amendment:

“Congress shall make no law … abridging … the right of the people … to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
— from the First Amendment

The petition clause concludes the First Amendment’s ringing enumeration of expressive rights and, in many ways, supports them all. Petition is the right to ask government at any level to right a wrong or correct a problem.

Although a petition is only as meaningful as its response, the petitioning right allows blocs of public interests to form, harnessing voting power in ways that effect change.

It’s your right and duty as a citizen of the United States of America to bring into the light of day the facts of harm and injury you have suffered due to lawlessness.

Number 2011-01
Page 1 of 2
To: All MERS Members February 16, 2011
Re: Foreclosure Processing and CRMS Scheduling MERS is providing the following guidance to all Members to strengthen business practices, and minimize reputation, legal and compliance risk to MERS and its Members. In recent months legal challenges have arisen regarding alleged inadequacies and improprieties in the foreclosure process including allegations of insufficient or incorrect supporting documentation and challenges to the legal capacity of parties’ right to foreclose. MERS is committed to reevaluate and strengthen its systems and procedures to protect against these types of legal challenges. Consistent with this approach we have enhanced the Corporate Resolution Management System (CRMS) and instituted related policies and procedures designed to strengthen MERS’ business practices and limit compliance risks. To comply with this guidance, MERS Members should implement the following practices, effective immediately.
1. MERS is planning to shortly announce a proposed amendment to Membership Rule 8. The proposed amendment will require Members to not foreclose in MERS’ name. Consistent with the Membership Rules there will be a 90-day comment period on the proposed Rule. During this period we request that Members do not commence foreclosures in MERS’ name. If a Member determines that it will commence a foreclosure in MERS’ name during this 90-day period, two weeks advance notice must be given to MERS to permit verification of the appointment and current status of the Certifying Officer proposed to participate in the foreclosure. No foreclosure may be processed in MERS’ name without first obtaining this verification. We encourage Members to bring foreclosures only in the name of the holder of the note, in the name of the trustee or the servicer of record acting on behalf of the trustee.
2. MERS Members shall have a MERS Certifying Officer (also known as MERS Signing Officer) execute assignments out of MERS’ name before initiating foreclosure proceedings. Assignments out of MERS’ name should be recorded in the county land records, even if the state law does not require such a recording (see MERS Membership Rule 8).
3. For all future assignments and the execution of other documents in the name of MERS, Members must use a MERS Certifying Officer who has been appointed under our new certifying officer process, which, after November 1, 2010, uses a new form of corporate resolution. Under our new process, all Certifying Officers are also being tested and appointed under the enhanced CRMS. Only Certifying Officers appointed under the new form of corporate resolution, tested, and transitioned onto CRMS after November 1, 2010 should execute assignments. We are in the process of ensuring that all Members are transitioned onto CRMS in compliance with our new policy, and we will work with all Members to ensure the transitions can be accomplished in an orderly and expeditious way. For those Members who have not undergone this transition onto the CRMS, you will receive login credentials and further instructions from MERS on how to complete this process. It is important that you follow all instructions and that you complete this process as quickly as possible. MERS will be communicating with you to notify you when your Company will be transitioned onto the CRMS under our new policy. Once your Company has access to the CRMS, all of your existing and potential Certifying Officers should work quickly to complete the certification process. Once all of your existing and potential Certifying Officers have successfully completed the certification process, you will need to submit your request to MERS for approval. Submissions from your Company will only be accepted during the phase-in period assigned to you. Because it will take some time to transition under our new policy, Certifying Officers can continue to execute documents in MERS’ name under existing resolutions until the new corporate resolution is issued to your Company. However, if your Company does not submit the request to MERS through the CRMS in the timeframe assigned to you, you will not be issued a new corporate resolution and any prior corporate resolutions issued to your company will be revoked.

MERS Members should ensure the accuracy of the information in the complaint and foreclosure affidavit that addresses, where applicable, the authorization under which a MERS Certifying Officer validly assigned the mortgage to the foreclosing note-holder.
5. Other business practices Members should perform on a periodic basis include:
 Conduct a review of employees designated as Certifying Officers and reconcile to the CRMS to ensure MERS has an up-to-date and accurate list of Certifying Officers;
 Ensure employees designated as Certifying Officers receive appropriate training to carry out their duties and responsibilities as Certifying Officers; and
 Reconcile with CRMS to update corporate resolutions and signing authority agreements to ensure appropriate Certifying Officers are validly appointed.
If you have any questions regarding this announcement, please contact the MERS Law Department at, or call the MERS corporate office at 703-761-1270 and ask for the MERS Law Department. The MERS Help Desk will not be able to assist in this matter.

Newest Members:

Berkadia Commercial Mortgage LLC (2)
Horsham, PA

Edgewater Home Loans, Inc.
St Louis Park, MN

Westfield Bank
Westfield, MA


COMBO Title and Securitization Search, Report, Documents, Analysis & Commentary SEE LIVINGLIES LITIGATION SUPPORT AT LUMINAQ.COM


SEE 60-minutes-securitization-property-titles-are-a-train-wreck


EDITORIAL COMMENT: Every day we take a little more lipstick off the pig and discover, of all things, A PIG! This is a basic challenge to Wall Street that is so simple and so right that there is nothing to do but obey — but they won’t. If all the MERS transactions are recorded, it would not only recover billions in unpaid recording and registration fees, but trigger other tax liabilities on Federal, State and Local levels. The whole REMIC exemption is based upon the REMIC vehicle being closed within 90 days.

Oops! Nearly all REMIC (SPV, TRUST) vehicles are still open (i.e., empty) after many years. And Wall Street’s fees taken under the cover of the REMIC transactions and hidden from all, would be painfully obvious resulting not only in monumental income tax liability but liability for fraudulent sale of securities, appraisal fraud on the property, RICO and many other causes of action too numerous to mention (see Causes of Action on left side of this Blog).

But that is just a dream. There is no way they can record all 80 million MERS transactions because many of them don’t actually exist. In the end, the issue is simple — are we going to sacrifice a system of title recordation in place for centuries with an exemption (get out of  jail free) card for Wall Street and thus create commercial chaos for decades or centuries to come? Or are we going to let the chips fall where they will? If the chips fall naturally, some people will make money and some people will lose money. Some people will be satisfied and some people will be mad as hell. That’s what happens in a free market, isn’t it?

All we are offered is POLICY argument that says POLICY is more important than the law. That has never been true in theory. But now the only way out for Wall Street is to make it true in theory as well as in practice. Abandoning the separate but equal powers of the judiciary and thus removing one leg of the three legged stool the founders created when they launched the USA would be the single most important element in the destruction of the country as it is presently constituted — causing a secession battle and the same problems that Russia had when stopped being the Soviet Union.

Basically Wall Street is saying “we went to all this trouble and expense to cheat and deceive you and we ought to be able to keep it. Screw you if you think you are getting any of it back.” The government is nodding its head like a head on a spring in the back seat of the car. The people are saying we want governance not pie-splitting. How this will all end up is going to be interesting and profound. Unless we apply the rule of law suggested simply by applying the requirement of recording transactions in a public registry, we will have about as much confidence in the stability of U.S. commerce as there is in any of the third world countries.

Every PONZI scheme fails. All efforts by Wall Street and the government controlled by Wall Street have failed to find an alternative way around the rule of law that doesn’t strike at the heart of our constitutional system. All the people who lose money in a PONZI scheme wish the scheme had gone on just long enough for THEM to get their money back and someone else to lose THEIR money. That’s where we are, folks, and the time to end every PONZI scheme is immediately before another person gets hurt.

These foreclosures are virtually all based on factually false and fraudulent representations, documentation, and premises. Practically none of the “mortgages” are legal and if any one of them was singularly the subject of a quiet title action, the homeowner would win on the merits, based upon the facts. It is only because of the volume of transactions that legislators and bureaucrats are scurrying around looking for a novel way out of this scam, because they are getting “benefits” from Wall Street. The requirement of recording, will expose the truth: (1) that the only real parties to the transaction are not present in any existing documents and (2) that the existing documents describe transactions that never actually took place. They can’t record these documents because most states make it a criminal offense to record, execute, witness or notarize fraudulent documents.


Greensboro, NC

April 7, 2011


Jeff Thigpen, Guilford County Register of Deeds

Ph. 336-451-5300

Ph. 336-641-3239


JOHN L. O’BRIEN, JR.                                                                                                          JEFF L. THIGPEN
Register of Deeds                                                                                                                    Register of Deeds

Commonwealth of Massachucetts                                                                            Guilford County, North Carolina
Phone: 978-542-1704                                                                                                           Phone: 336-451-5300
Fax: 978-542-1706                                                                                                                  Fax: 336-641-5778
website: website:

April 6, 2011

The Honorable Tom Miller
Iowa Attorney General
1305 E. Walnut Street
Des Moines IA 50319

Dear Attorney General Miller,

We appreciate your leadership in the mortgage foreclosure working group, as part of a coordinated national effort by states, to review the practice of “robo-signing” within the mortgage servicing industry.   We understand this investigation is nearing conclusion, but we want to implore you to act on a very important issue to homeowners across the country.

As County Land Record Recorders in Massachusetts and North Carolina, we have been gravely concerned about the role of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) in not only foreclosure proceedings, but as it undermines the legislative intent of our offices as stewards of land records.   MERS tracks more than 60 million mortgages across the United States and we believe it has assumed a role that has put constructive notice and the property rights system at risk.    We believe MERS undermines the historic purpose of land record recording offices and the “chain of title” that assures ownership rights in land records.

As a result, we are asking as part of your probe, that this task force and the National Association of Attorney Generals require that all past and present MERS assignments of deeds of trust/mortgages be filed in local recording offices throughout the United States immediately.  Assignments are required by statute to be filed in Massachusetts, however they are not currently required to be recorded in North Carolina.   We feel, that it is important that the Registers of Deeds should have representatives at the table before any settlement is discussed or agreed to as it relates to MERS failure to record assignments and pay the proper fees.

This action would serve three specific purposes.   First, the filing of all assignments would help recover the chain of title that determines property ownership rights that has been lost and clouded over during the past 13 years because of the scheme that MERS has set in place.  Second, transparency and confidence in ownership rights would be restored and this would prevent the infringement upon those rights by others.   Third, this action would support a return to sound fundamentals in our economy between the financial services industry and public recording offices.

MERS has defended their practices by saying that they were helping the registries of deeds by reducing the amount of paperwork that needed to be recorded. This claim is outrageous.  This is help we did not ask for, nor was it help that we needed.  It is very clear that the only ones that they were helping were themselves. Over the past 10-12 years, recording offices across the United States have upgraded their internal and external technology to meet the demands of lenders, title underwriters, title searchers and citizens.  In fact, in 1998 the Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds in Massachusetts became the first registry of deeds to provide both document images and indices available to the public, 24 hours a day, free of charge on the world-wide-web. In doing so, the Registry received a Computerworld Smithsonian Award which recognized the innovative use of technology to benefit society. In 2009, the Guilford County Register of Deeds was given a Local Government Federal Credit Union Productivity Award by the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners for their technological innovations.  Nationally, over 93% of the public land records are up to date and current, according to Ernest Publishing.

As of today, there are over 600 recording jurisdictions, covering 43% of the US population that have incorporated an eRecording model into their document recording operations.   We believe these jurisdictions cover nearly 80% of the volume of assignments that should be recorded.  The remaining areas could be covered quickly, with legislation requiring such action by state legislatures.

Quite frankly, we believe this can and should be done.  It’s the right thing to do.

In the coming weeks, we will be working with our national organizations, the National Association of County Recorders, Election Officials and Clerks (NACRC) and the International Association of Clerks, Recorders, Election Officials, and Treasurers (IACREOT) to take the same position.   We are also sending a copy of this letter to the National Conference on State Legislatures (NCSL) and the National Association of Counties (NACO).

Thank you for your immediate attention.


Jeff L.Thigpen
Guilford County Register of Deeds, NC

John O’Brien
Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds, MA


SOURCE: Jeff Thigpen

How Many Banks Does It Take to Screw America?


EDITOR’S NOTE: The assumption is that if MERS is screwed we are all saved. I have it on incontrovertible authority that the mega banks already have a plan mapped out for that and in fact they are already putting it into action. Considering their success in kicking the can down the road so far, any singing and dancing should be muted. You see they don’t have to do anything because nothing will happen to them no matter what they do. That is the status quo and it does not seem like that is going to change.

So don’t rely upon the assumption that they are going to be required to give homeowners or borrowers something like the “free house” myth which they turned upside down on borrowers while the banks themselves stole the houses with a “credit bid” instead of cash.

ON THE OTHER HAND, LET’S LOOK AT THE LEGAL STATUS QUO AND YOU’LL SEE WHY THE LAWYERS ON THE OTHER SIDE ARE GETTING NERVOUS. It’s quite possible, even probable now, that in order to perfect the correct loan documents the banks, the pretenders, whoever (watch out for scams here) are going to offer incentives for homeowners to SIGN NEW DOCUMENTS. From what I’ve seen so far, it is pretty obvious and quite definitely confirmed by friends from the dark side that they are not going to sponsor a barbecue where they give out money. A toaster oven maybe, but not the whole mortgage.

BUT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE AS NASTY AS I AM, HAVE VERY LITTLE TO LOSE HOLDING OUT TO THE BITTER END AND REFUSING TO SIGN ANYTHING AND PURSUING QUIET TITLE. So far the number of people I have seen willing to tough out the case until the biter end is less than 3%, which is about half the normal default rate. So even if the number of people willing to fight doubles, the banks still have nothing to lose even if they give up the entire house equity and mortgage and note and even pay attorneys fees and damages. It’s no more than a rounding error.

THE FACT THAT AMERICA IS SCREWED BY THIS SECURITIZATION ILLUSION doesn’t bother anyone on Wall Street — it never did. The only thing Wall Street works for is a trade where something of perceived value moves and a fee is earned. Now here is the surprise for those regular readers of this publication: I don’t think there is anything wrong with Wall Street’s intent. They weren’t out to ruin the country, they just didn’t care. They were doing what they were created to do — improve liquidity to grease the wheels of commerce. I’m not saying that nobody should go to jail, mind you, but the real problem is that the promoters and creators of this so-called securitization scheme that never actually existed were never under any impression that they were breaking any law or that even if they did anything would happen to them. And they were right.

If you think you hate Wall Street, think again. What you really hate is the fact that government didn’t do the job of controlling Wall Street — a lesson we learned in the roaring 20’s, the salad oil scandal, the savings and loan scandal, the Long Term Capital Management Scandal, Enron, World-com, etc. etc. So if someone has you supporting a restriction on government regulation, they are being paid by Wall Street to keep you thinking that way. Think about it.

MERS Tapped for Federal Investigation

By: David Dayen Wednesday March 2, 2011 1:45 pm

We have yet another major bank today that fully expects to be dinged by federal and state regulators for sloppy mortgage practices.

PNC Financial Services Group Inc. expects to sign consent orders with U.S. regulators because of allegedly faulty mortgage servicing and foreclosures.

The orders are likely to come from the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, Pittsburgh-based PNC said today in its annual filing with securities regulators. The actions may include activities tied to the Mortgage Electronic Registration System, the registry designed to track mortgage-servicing rights and ownership of U.S. residential loans, according to the filing.

The MERS piece is interesting. As we know, MERS is basically at the end of its rope, forced to tell servicers to stop foreclosing in its name because of a string of lost court cases. Now, PNC, along with BofA and Citigroup, are saying publicly in regulatory filings that MERS may be ruled essentially invalid for mortgage transfers. Keep in mind that the major banks created MERS and still fund it.

Bank of America said legal challenges against MERS have asserted that use of the system can “cloud ownership” of a loan, according to its filing. The Charlotte, North Carolina- based lender, which ranks second in U.S. home lending and first among mortgage servicers, said it uses MERS for “a substantial portion” of new home loans, including those sold to investors or transferred into securitized trusts.

The process “is based on a well-established body of law that establishes ownership of mortgage loans by the securitization trusts, and we believe that we have substantially executed this process,” Bank of America said in its filing.

The question of MERS’s “legitimacy” drew scrutiny from the U.S. Justice Department and Congress as well as regulators and state attorneys general, Citigroup said in its filing. The bank “has determined that the integrity of its current foreclosure process is sound,” the New York-based firm said.

What does this mean for outstanding loans? Many states are working on legislation that would disallow foreclosures on homes without a full chain of title. California is the latest. If MERS is forced to the sidelines, or their process ruled invalid, what does this mean for the chain of title?

There’s a way out of this for the banks, to clean up the complete mess they’ve made, but they’d have to actually provide homeowners with relief to compensate for their near-destruction of the residential housing market. To those who find this unworkable – the serious ones, not McMegan – I would simply ask them what they believe is the proper relief. Because aside from the fact that investors and not servicers should be able to determine whether they allow principal mods to borrowers in trouble, and that all economic signs point to that as the best way to stop foreclosures and save the economy, allowing yet another massive case of financial fraud to pass without punishment does more damage to the integrity of the country than anything I can think of.

%d bloggers like this: