Recontrust / Bank of America Foreclosure Injunction Dissolved by Federal Judge

Clark Waddoups (AP photo)
utdecf_waddoups@utd.uscourts.gov
Clark Waddoups (AP photo)(Salt Lake City, UT) – Federal Judge Clark Waddoups issued the following court order just before noon Friday.

“The court held a hearing on this matter on June 10, 2010. For the reasons to be explained

in a memorandum decision that the court shall file shortly, the court ORDERS as follows:

Plaintiff’s motions to remand are DENIED;

Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint is GRANTED;

Defendants’ motion to vacate the Utah state court’s preliminary injunction order is GRANTED;

Defendants’ motion to expedite the hearing is moot; and consideration of Plaintiff’s motion for partial summary judgment is deferred.

The preliminary injunction of May 22, 2010 issued by the Utah state court is hereby DISSOLVED in its entirety.”

John Christian Barlow, attorney for the plaintiff, Peni Cox likely is surprised by the court ruling that allows Utah law to be trumped by a nationally charter financial institution that can continue to operate faceless its subsidaries in Utah without registration or offices.

As one state lawmaker told KCSG news, this will only serve to get state lawmakers energized to put an end to homeowners (taxpayers) being victimized by mortgage lenders like the Bank of America who acquired Countrywide Home Loans in a stock deal worth billions and took TARP bailout money, too. he said. Barlow’s arguments fell on deaf ears in federal court allowing ReconTrust Company to continue their foreclosures.

Homeowners continue to seek redress through the courts without success against lenders that have bundled the homeowner promissory note with others and sold them as securities through Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS). www.mersinc.org

Attorney Barlow was traveling and unavailable for comment to KCSG News as was the plaintiff Peni Cox.

Judge Clark Waddoups can be reached by email at utdecf_waddoups@utd.uscourts.gov

~

Comments
9 Responses to “Recontrust / Bank of America Foreclosure Injunction Dissolved by Federal Judge”
  1. Yvonne S Ewins Hammon says:

    Update 10 23 2013 to Yvonne S Ewins Hammon
    I only wish to thank what ever judge helped and I be leave more then one. in 8 years of the banks trying to take the property the records shows all is now canceled but other offices of B of A keep trying even though they have now now teeth the judge pulled them,.my home is safe but at what price??? my husband died in 2011 90% stress. now it is only me and the kids. and I have AAA an arty problem due to the stress so now I only pray I can last long enough to pass it down to the kids.with help of my son maybe. for they will need it
    more then I But again THANK YOU TO THE COURTS AND THE JUDGE FOR HELPING TO SAVE MY HOME GOOD BLESS YOU ..ALL

  2. J Glenn Lowe says:

    EVERYONE TELL OBAMA TO CRASH THE BIG BANKS NOW!

    The Fed and their complicit banks must be abolished to save the Republic!

    It’s the only thing we can do. CRASH THE BIG BANKS NOW “Too Big Too Fail” apparently means “Too Big To Succeed” and “Too Big for their own Wallets”

    The sooner the better. Why don’t we ask a 3rd grade math student what he thinks? The real problem is that a politician who could do something about it has his own mathematical challenges about healthy economies. “Bite the hand that feeds him” (by indicting Banksters), or make millions putting children in the streets for power and profit.

    Apparently ALL politicians are going to make the same choice over and over again. They have always sold the souls of your children and their future and they always will. Take the big Banksters out of the picture. Build a local banking system that cares about its community and helps it thrive instead of sucking the life out of it by bribing and fixing the entire system for itself, taking us all of a cliff with it.

    Crash all the big banks now. Create new local Banks only = No more Wall Street Banksters.

    Problem Solved!

    J Glenn Lowe

    Die Banker Die – A Tribute to the Wall Street Banksters that suck the life from all of us and our economy just to get a nice Christmas Bonus – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGFZ1Jj3ui8

  3. debi J says:

    Why are our courts accepting this nonsense? Because it easier? Or Faster? . The bank may not even own your note and may not have legal standing to foreclose. Everyone should get a viable forensic audit to verify who owns it and has the right to foreclose. This will not only enhance your bargaining power, for a modification, but may show the bank has no legal standing to torture u any more. Call me-or check out-
    http://www.mfi-miami.com
    561-389-9339. Hopefully we can help u w/this vulger attack upon the american people and our high courts!! Good luck, dont give up the fight okay!! Debi J -Boynton Bch FL

  4. Bank of America frauds/ countrywide home loans

    I have a Grant Deed to my home a homestead Declaration/and befour that a Substitution of trustee and a full
    Recononveyance also and they are going to sell my home out from under me. first posted forsale on 28 july now is extended to the 11 of August 2010 but they have forcesed on me with a Grant Deed forcesed to get a attorney ans they runed my credit and my hubands to so. no loan can be gotton , the attorney is brakeing up fees to $ 2,500.00 in august and same in
    September then it will go to 1,200.00 a month fee till 3,11 2011 at least i will still have my home, but to be able to do that will leave us with nothing to live on so will be serlling off any thing i can to pay the bills
    , what i do know, their is no grantee on the recording so the money would haft to come to me at 40 cents on the dollar! if a grant deed can be attacked , by the BofA and recon trust of semi valley california . why own a home

    the banks own it.any way. every one should get toghter , if you know of any class action suits agenst them I’m in. will be real hard for the the next two months but with out a attorney they would win I would bet.
    due to now they do not haft to give you a chance in court at all. to say your defence or to stop them .
    they run a add / post your property of date of sale and your done , unless you seek a attorney weather you can aford one or not I have had my home 47 years now it was my parents be me, I only pray I can save it from the
    money grubing banks / if we live on bean or what ever i will fight . yvonne hammon

  5. Storm says:

    The attorney who filed this nonsense attended a seminar I gave this past weekend, he knows better now!

  6. Dave Wellington says:

    This issue raises some interesting questions since it is NOT the lender/owner of the mortgage doing any foreclosure, but instead is a mortgage servicing company, a company that does NOT own the mortgage. Utah law [48-2c-1602(h)] only excludes from the registration requirement those who are “securing or collecting debts IN ITS OWN BEHALF or enforcing mortgages or security interests in property securing those debts” (emphasis added). The first part of this is pretty clear that one must be acting ‘in its own behalf’ (i.e. be the owner of the mortgage). The latter part is not so clear. In either case, the focus needs to be on who is doing what, and what actual relationship they have with the mortgage note/deed of trust. (Many notes simply don’t exist, or were separated from the deed of trust). The issue of state registration is interesting, but I think clouds the more fundamental issues: note ownership (not just possession), and whether the note and trust deed have been separated, making either one nearly worthless on its own as a basis for foreclosure.

  7. Many state courts agree that where a party seeks to foreclose a mortgage on property situated within the state, the part is not required to register as a business transacting business within the state. Similarly, mere ownership of a mortgage, whether converted into a security or not, also does not constitute doing business in the state. The inference I make from what is known so far is that the state does not have jurisdiction over a Federally chartered institution which holds mortgages secured by properties located in the state. Does this not mean, at the same time, that there is federal jurisdiction over the federally chartered bank that can still be sued for wrongful foreclosure in Federal Court?

Trackbacks
Check out what others are saying...


Leave a Reply