Have a Note? Commercial or Residential – Obligors, Attorneys, Judges, Investors – You NEED to Read This!

Candy Bar

We will assume this is a Real Candy Bar and not some knock off claiming to be a candy bar.


Buyer wants candy bar. Buyer goes to store and conducts a transaction that evolves giving the seller a dollar bill and in return leaves with a candy bar. Buyer leaves with candy bar and seller has the dollar bill and can do whatever he likes with the dollar bill as these actions will not affect the buyer. An action that could take place here is if the seller says he was not paid and the buyer stole the candy bar. There is no proof that the buyer gave the seller a dollar bill in the purchase of the candy bar unless the serial number was recorded by the buyer prior to the transaction. Seller in reverse cannot prove the candy bar was stolen.

Each party goes their own way.


Buyer purchases a candy bar on credit and signs a slip that states he owes the seller a dollar bill. Later the buyer goes back and gives the seller a dollar bill and retrieves the slip that the seller had filed away in his till that says buyer owes the seller a dollar bill. Each party goes there on way. (My grandma used to sign slips and grandpa would pay up at the end of each month)

Without knowing the exact wording of the slip it would be impossible to determine whether the slip was a negotiable or non‐negotiable instrument. In this instance there is no requirement to determine whether the slip is negotiable or non‐negotiable as either condition of negotiability would be legal.

Buyer gives seller dollar and each party goes their own way.


Buyer purchases a candy bar on credit and signs a slip that states he owes the seller a dollar bill. In this instant the seller had intentions to take the buyers slip and sell the enforcement and collection rights to a 3rd party. 3rd party offers the slip up for sale to a 4th party. If all assignments are attached then 4th party can go get the dollar bill from the buyer.

Buyer gives 4th party dollar bill and gets the slip back and each party goes their own way.

Now we have entered the world of negotiable instruments and the laws that govern negotiable instruments are very precise. Assignment laws as defined by the UCC result in establishing the legal recipient entitled to collect the dollar bill from the buyer. In the absence of assignments, which of the (3) parties is entitled to collect the dollar bill?

Note: There is a difference between holder and holder in due course as defined by the UCC.


Buyer purchases a candy bar on credit and signs a slip that states he owes the seller a dollar bill. In this instant the seller had intentions to take the buyers slip and sell the enforcement and collection rights to a 3rd party. Seller takes the slip and makes a copy on a copy machine and sells this copy to the 3rd party. Seller and 3rd party working in tangent with each other know that the copy of the slip will be further offered up for sale to a 4th party. To aid this perpetrated fraud we create a company that will track the location of the slip and will paste notices on all the billboards that these actions are legal.

Buyer only owes a dollar bill to the one that can prove that a dollar bill is owed.

In this instance proof could never be offered as the lack of assignments cannot prove who is entitled to receive the dollar bill and fraud has been committed by the seller and 3rd party which renders the original slip nullity.

For “A” in California, even a candy bar scenario is not as simple as it seems, very few people have dwelt into the precise UCC laws governing negotiable instruments. It’s not what the buyer does but it’s what the seller, 3rd & 4th party does that destroys the legal enforcement rights of the instrument.

This is what the judges cannot see.



4 Responses to “Have a Note? Commercial or Residential – Obligors, Attorneys, Judges, Investors – You NEED to Read This!”
  1. tony brown says:

    I’m not a MOM loan the loan transferred off of MERS, Mers no longer tracked the assignments and let’s not forget I HAVE IN MY POSSESSION THE ORIGINAL NOTE STAMPED FULLY PAID AND SATISFIED. The note is date stamped MARCH 2002 and has been in my possession since 2004 along with a letter from the original lender stating the loan is fully paid and satisfied address to me which is the declaritory letter. Come on let’s put these people where they belong…. Federal prison.

  2. tony brown says:

    Now are you with me( no chain of title) the new owner produced in discovery to me an allonge from the original lender to ABC with the lost note affidivat. ABC showed an allonge to XYZ which skipped DEF. Now DEF was the depositer into the securities, hence securities fraud.First let start with the allonges: according to the UCC an allonge is only used when there is NO ROOM ON THE ORIGINAL NOTE FOR ENDORSEMENT and must be firmly attached as to become a part of the note. AN ALLONGE cannot be used to transfer interest and is invalid if there is room on the note for endorsements and is invalid it not attached.so far the fraudesters has used a lost note and two allonges that were not signed and not dated and even skipped the owner that desposited it into the securities, now let’s look at the prospectus:Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Inc · 424B5 · Bear Stearns Asset Backed Certificates Series 2003-2 · On 6/30/03
    Document 1 of 1 · 424B5 · Prospectus

    . Assignment of the Mortgage Loans; Repurchase At the time of issuance of the certificates, the depositor will cause the mortgage loans, together with all principal and interest due with respect to such mortgage loans after the cut-off date to be sold to the trust. The mortgage loans in each of the mortgage loan groups will be identified in a schedule appearing as an exhibit to the pooling and servicing agreement with each mortgage loan group separately identified. Such schedule will include information as to the principal balance of each mortgage loan as of the cut-offdate, as well as information including, among other things, the mortgage rate,the borrower’s monthly payment and the maturity date of each mortgage note. In addition, the depositor will deposit with Wells Fargo Bank Minnesota, National Association, as custodian and agent for the trustee, the following documents with respect to each mortgage loan: (a) except with respect to a MOM loan, the original mortgage note, endorsed without recourse in the following form: “Pay to the order of JPMorgan Chase Bank, as S-40——————————————————————————–

    trustee for certificateholders of Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2003-2 without recourse,” with all intervening endorsements, to the extent available, showing a complete chain of endorsement from the originator to the seller or, if the original mortgage note is unavailable to the depositor, a photocopy thereof, if available, together with a lost note affidavit; (b) the original recorded mortgage or a photocopy thereof, and if the related mortgage loan is a MOM loan, noting the applicable mortgage identification number for that mortgage loan; (c) except with respect to a mortgage loan that is registered on the MERS(R) System, a duly executed assignment of the mortgage to “JPMorgan Chase Bank, as trustee for certificateholders of Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2003-2, without recourse;” in recordable form, as described in the pooling and servicing agreement; (d) originals or duplicates of all interim recorded assignments of such mortgage, if any and if available to the depositor; (e) the original or duplicate original lender’s title policy or, in the event such original title policy has not been received from the insurer, such original or duplicate original lender’s title policy shall be delivered within one year of the closing date or, in the event such original lender’s title policy is unavailable, a photocopy of such title policy or, in lieu thereof, a current lien search on the related property; and (f) the original or a copy of all available assumption, modification or substitution agreements, if any. In general, assignments of the mortgage loans provided to the custodianon behalf of the trustee will not be recorded in the appropriate public officefor real property records, based upon an opinion of counsel to the effect that such recording is not required to protect the trustee’s interests in the mortgage loan against the claim of any subsequent transferee or any successor toor creditor of the depositor or the seller, or as to which the rating agencies advise that the omission to record therein will not affect their ratings of the offered certificates. In connection with the assignment of any mortgage loan that is registered on the MERS(R) System, the depositor will cause the MERS(R) System to indicate that those mortgage loans have been assigned by EMC to the depositor and by the depositor to the trustee by including (or deleting, in the case of repurchased mortgage loans) in the computer files (a) the code in the field which identifies the trustee and (b) the code in the field “Pool Field” which identifies the series of certificates issued. Neither the depositor nor themaster servicer will alter these codes (except in the case of a repurchasedmortgage loan). A “MOM loan” is any mortgage loan as to which, at origination, MortgageElectronic Registration Systems, Inc. acts as mortgagee, solely as nominee forthe originator of that mortgage loan and its successors and assigns. S-41——————————————————————————–

    The custodian on behalf of the trustee will perform a limited review ofthe mortgage loan documents on or prior to the closing date or in the case ofany document permitted to be delivered after the closing date, promptly afterthe custodian’s receipt of such documents and will hold such documents in trustfor the benefit of the holders of the certificates. In addition, the seller will make representations and warranties in thepooling and servicing agreement as of the cut-off date in respect of themortgage loans. The depositor will file the pooling and servicing agreementcontaining such representations and warranties with the Securities and ExchangeCommission in a report on Form 8-K following the closing date. After the closing date, if any document is found to be missing ordefective in any material respect, or if a representation or warranty withrespect to any mortgage loan is breached and such breach materially andadversely affects the interests of the holders of the certificates in suchmortgage loan, the custodian, on behalf of the trustee, is required to notifythe seller in writing. If the seller cannot or does not cure such omission,defect or breach within 90 days of its receipt of notice from the custodian, theseller is required to repurchase the related mortgage loan from the trust fundat a price equal to 100% of the stated principal balance thereof as of the dateof repurchase plus accrued and unpaid interest thereon at the mortgage rate tothe first day of the month following the month of repurchase. In addition, ifthe obligation to repurchase the related mortgage loan results from a breach ofthe seller’s representations regarding predatory lending, the seller will be obligated to pay any resulting costs and damages incurred by the trust. Ratherthan repurchase the mortgage loan as provided above, the seller may remove suchmortgage loan from the trust fund and substitute in its place another mortgageloan of like characteristics; however, such substitution is only permittedwithin two years after the closing date. With respect to any repurchase or substitution of a mortgage loan thatis not in default or as to which a default is not imminent, the trustee must have received a satisfactory opinion of counsel that such repurchase orsubstitution will not cause the trust fund to lose the status of its REMIC.

  3. tony brown says:

    Now let’a get to the fraud. Mers was named nominee on the mortgage and filed at the ROD, supposedily according to a lost note affidivat the original lender sold the note and according to MERS servicer ID the loan was transfered off of the MERS system and MIN# deactivated because of a sale to a non-mers member in 2002. NO ASSIGNMENT WAS RECORDED.Now owner ABC sold the loan to owner DEF which deposited into the asset backed securites and yet put into a trust hence the assignment/sell to XYZ to the trustee. Now there has been a foreclosure started on the loan by another party not listed so far called a successor trustee who claims to be the real party in interest and hold the note. By way Of an assignment which was recorded at the ROD after the LIS-PENDENS and after the filing of complaint.Here is more fraud because the assignment was from MERS on behalf of the original lender which is defunct and has been since 2005 to the new owner and holder of the note BBB. MERS has no authority to do an assignment because loan was transferred from them in 2002.

  4. tony brown says:

    I have the original note signed in ink stamped fully paid and satisfied and endorsed the UCC is clear:U.C.C. – ARTICLE 3 – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
    § 3-201. NEGOTIATION.
    (a) “Negotiation” means a transfer of possession, whether voluntary or involuntary, of an instrument by a person other than the issuer to a person who thereby becomes its holder.
    (b) Except for negotiation by a remitter, if an instrument is payable to an identified person, negotiation requires transfer of possession of the instrument and its indorsement by the holder. If an instrument is payable to bearer, it may be negotiated by transfer of possession alone.
    “Person entitled to enforce” an instrument means (i) the holder of the instrument, (ii) a nonholder in possession of the instrument who has the rights of a holder, or (iii) a person not in possession of the instrument who is entitled to enforce the instrument pursuant to Section 3-309 or 3-418(d). A person may be a person entitled to enforce the instrument even though the person is not the owner of the instrument or is in wrongful possession of the instrument.

    § 3-302. HOLDER IN DUE COURSE.

    (a) Subject to subsection (c) and Section 3-106(d), “holder in due course” means the holder of an instrument if:
    (1) the instrument when issued or negotiated to the holder does not bear such apparent evidence of forgery or alteration or is not otherwise so irregular or incomplete as to call into question its authenticity; and
    (2) the holder took the instrument (i) for value, (ii) in good faith, (iii) without notice that the instrument is overdue or has been dishonored or that there is an uncured default with respect to payment of another instrument issued as part of the same series, (iv) without notice that the instrument contains an unauthorized signature or has been altered, (v) without notice of any claim to the instrument described in Section 3-306, and (vi) without notice that any party has a defense or claim in recoupment described in Section 3-305(a).
    (b) Notice of discharge of a party, other than discharge in an insolvency proceeding, is not notice of a defense under subsection (a), but discharge is effective against a person who became a holder in due course with notice of the discharge. Public filing or recording of a document does not of itself constitute notice of a defense, claim in recoupment, or claim to the instrument.
    (c) Except to the extent a transferor or predecessor in interest has rights as a holder in due course, a person does not acquire rights of a holder in due course of an instrument taken (i) by legal process or by purchase in an execution, bankruptcy, or creditor’s sale or similar proceeding, (ii) by purchase as part of a bulk transaction not in ordinary course of business of the transferor, or (iii) as the successor in interest to an estate or other organization

Leave a Reply