REVENGE OF THE DEBTORS – WHO CAN LEGALLY ENFORCE A MORTGAGE AFTER A “LANDMARK” CASE

“These cases encourage debtors and other parties to defensively use the mortgage securitization servicing system to prohibit servicers and other non-lending parties from enforcing rights under a mortgage. This trend, if it continues, may have significant impacts for consumer-debtor lawyers, as well as law firms that enforce mortgages and participated in mortgage loan securitization.”

“A note and mortgage may go through multiple transfers. Documentation of these transfers is imperfect, and many assignments were not recorded at the local real estate filing offices.”

“The creation of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) further complicated matters.”

“For instance, if a debtor raises these or similar defenses, it may only be necessary for the servicers and the mortgagees to complete and file the proper assignment documents.

The fabricated fraudulent assignment.

4closureFraud
http://4closurefraud.org/

[scribd id=22811828 key=key-2fqfzb5iofm8x4mcnmkh]

Comments
10 Responses to “REVENGE OF THE DEBTORS – WHO CAN LEGALLY ENFORCE A MORTGAGE AFTER A “LANDMARK” CASE”
  1. iz says:

    Why are people still talking about the issues as if a loan was really made. NO loans were made. NO loans are being made. There is NO loan. What don’t people get? Why are lawyers waltzing into court litigating loan issues, when there is NO LOAN!? If you pay $1,000 or more to a lawyer, they damn well better be doing the damn job of investigating the damn facts. Common sense should tell you, if the issue is re-payment of a loan, then the first thing to do is obtain the paper trail in order to identify who the alleged lender is, right?

    If they were doing their jobs they would know, THERE IS NO LENDER. THERE IS NO LOAN.

    Only the conversion of a Borrowers Promissory Note. It shouldn’t be hard since the Federal Reserve itself has published at least 5 publications admitting to it in detailed explanations.

    Enter them into evidence because judicial notice is mandatory. Then demand your right to have the Bank produce a T accounting of the alleged loan. It’s not rocket science.

    Stop arguing about loans that don’t exist.

  2. Mad as Hell in Maryland says:

    Whats good for the goose, should be good for the gander. Its time we turned the tables on them, and used the rule of law to solve the problem.

  3. anon says:

    Banks should surrender title to the borrower since they were defrauded., not to mention damages. A just and positive outcome for America.

    Dismissing a foreclosure is not enough.

    • A small group of private MEMBERS of financial exchange defrauded consumers both investors of the securitized instruments and the misrepresentation, false statements and false claims are substantive Omissions of Material Facts, intent – did take propety into pipeline by deception.

      The loan # assigned to the property, think of as a purchase order the SELLER affixed to documents the BUYER funding deposited into the SELLER’s “as Depositor” Corporate Treasury Securities CUSTODIAN – Settlement Agent Account.

      Does the funding purchasing the loan# which was placed by the SELLER into the unsecuritized pipeline with INTENT of MASTER SERVICER incorporating into a loan trust, got ratings and did not place anything into the loan trust until the Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corp employees for example were paid by MASTER SERVICER ‘upfront fees’ for the Estimated Value of the empty Loan Trust.

      Then, what if that is the case?

      The Borrower who was harmed and the Investor who was harmed and the Lender who was harmed – what is the right remedy?

    • jim says:

      i agree with this anon, if an american citizen breaks the law they go to jail or lose a lot, why should a business be any different , why are they treating these big banks with kit gloves, they defrauded the natiion they effectively destroyed ours and others economies, they lied to their friends on wall street, they produced fraududantly documents, they lied to customers, they ran dual track stratagies and have effectively forclosed on people in ways not within the true course and regulations, they have added charge upon charge of questionably note all to line their pockets. they should lose all their holdings in this nation and any other nation they have destroyed with their greed and missconduct,. and yet the american people continue to sleep, oh dont get me wrong they are waking but slowly. pass the word, report complaints to your congressmen and govoners only after seeing where their money comes from

  4. Sonya says:

    GEORGIA RESIDENTS: Getting together a Class Action Lawsuit against Bank of America. Having Foreclosure problems? We want to hear your case. sonya36767@yahoo.com dfg@guldenschuhlaw.com 706-295-0333

  5. Nathanael says:

    Heh. The things described as “prudent” in this note would more accurately be described as “minimum legal requirements” — tracing the ownership of the note and mortgage, filing suit in the name of the current holder of the note, etc.

  6. Loni says:

    I agree if the securitization voids the contract thats that. Why should homeowners not benefit just as much as the banks when it comes to this whole situation? My issue is I can’t take speculation and opinion into court. I have the UCC3 however it would be helpful to have the SEC requirements and a copy of the Secutization and pooling agreement contract and (I could get that in discovery I suppose) and it would be super helpful to have case law in support of this position. Otherwise I and others like me are pathfinders.

  7. Mike says:

    Interesting opinion but I think you’re missing the boat on the whole deal. The real issue is UCC 3 statutes and the separation of the note from the mortgage from inception.

    Up until this point, the easy way to go is challenge the standing to file suit or foreclose. As has been pointed out the paperwork is no where in line. So make them get it right. If they can do that, then the next thing is to make them show how they ended up with the note.

    If the note has been securitized then the mortgage is no longer security for the note. You also make them prove the note hasn’t already been paid for through cross collateralization, insurance, credit default swaps and even TARP. If it has then the notes been canceled. Just read any of the SEC filings these banks used when packaging the notes and they even state the mortgage was not collateral for the notes. What else do you need?

    What do I know, I’m just an interested party looking in?

    • Billy Hynes says:

      Hello from Ireland Mike!
      I am interested in your know how on the mortgage front. I am not a legal person but I am looking to educate myself as soon as possible as things have become very serious over here.
      Our government have bailed out the banks here and made them sign up to a twelve month stay on foreclosures. That time is almost up now and the banks are expected to start exercising their rights. The amount of people (fine people) committing suicide over here has rocketed. There is no excuse for these people feeling such pressure as to snap under the strain of pressure applied by the actual wrong doers.
      I am looking to set up a local help group for debt issues and expand it into all other local areas ASAP.
      My email is kitchenwarehouse@eircom.net
      Thank You.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *