Philadelphia Homeowner ‘Forecloses’ on Wells Fargo

Now we are talkin…

Imagine if thousands of homeowners went down this path…

It is not much different than the one we covered on the Deadbeat Bank Gets Served last week…

Actually, this should be a national movement.

Get a QWR violation judgment, since they never answer them, then go to the court and get an order to seize the banks property for nonpayment.

Pretty simple actually.

Turn the “Deadbeat” factor on them for not paying their bills…

Phila. homeowner wins judgment against Wells Fargo over mortgage fees

It’s not clear how this story will turn out, but right now Patrick Rodgers is living a pay-back fantasy probably shared by millions of struggling U.S. homeowners.

Frustrated by a dispute with Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and by his inability to get answers to questions, the West Philadelphia homeowner took the mortgage company to court last fall.

When Wells Fargo still didn’t respond, Rodgers got a $1,000 default judgment against it for failing to answer his formal questions, as required by a federal law called the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act.

And when the mortgage company didn’t pay – does something sound familiar? – Rodgers turned to Philadelphia’s sheriff.

The result: At least for the moment, the contents of Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, 1341 N. Delaware Ave., are scheduled for sheriff’s sale on March 4 to satisfy the judgment and pay about $200 for court and sheriff’s costs.

Rodgers has even written his own headline: “Philadelphia homeowner ‘forecloses’ on Wells Fargo.”

Read more of this awesome story here…

I encourage you share this with everyone you know battling the banks, in foreclosure or not…

Let’s flip it back on them…


20 Responses to “Philadelphia Homeowner ‘Forecloses’ on Wells Fargo”
  1. JohnD says:

    Just look up the RESPA laws and you’ll see how he did it. I have a question…does the date on the Mortgage and the date signed and notorized have to be the same?


  2. Peter Zeppeiro says:

    California courts and banks seem to have their hands in each others pockets.

    • Kalen says:

      I think you misunderstood the details of the article. The courts ruled in favor of the plaintiff, not the bank. The mortgage company had to pay him for failing to answer his questions and later the contents of the bank were being sold by the sheriffs office. That is why the title of the article is Homeowner Forecloses on Wells Fargo.

  3. I am not an attorney so this advice is strictly personal.

    California allows a QWR under Civ. Code sect. 2943. I requested a beneficiary statement and copy of the note. Lender processor charged the allowed $30, and sent back forgery of note. It costs $400 to file and serve papers and law allows $300 award. Then the California courts came up with this insane decision that ‘… all costs …’ doesn’t mean ‘all’, because in some other statute in foreclosure code the phrase ‘… including court costs and fees’ had been added after the ‘all costs’. Since this statute didn’t include ‘… including court costs and fees’ all doesn’t mean all. So you pay nearly $500 to recover $300.

    That’s the typical Kalifornia economic model used by Kalifornia Kangaroo Kourts

  4. macy says:

    would love to know the steps he took as my QWR was never answered either.

  5. Elaine S says:

    Stopping all foreclosures that have MERS as a nominee however is now fully justified. Their business model is to separate the mortgage or deed of trust , thus they have separated the note from the security making it an unsecured note, at the inception. hence no foreclosure possible! Furthermore they claim they are not a beneficiary, hence they have no standing to assign any notes! (Because they never own any of the notes.)
    See the In RE Agard ruling and the “Ibanez” appellate court ruling.

    Stopping foreclosures for those who did it correctly is unjustified. And would be perpetrating a wrong.

  6. l vent says:

    This is the outcome of a corrupt financial system with a Government that refuses to place an indefinite Nationwide Moratorium on the fraudclosures. Everything is rigged including our elections, in favor of the elite and the politicians are getting into office and getting rich by aiding and abettting the criminals on Wall Street and the Banksters. If the criminals do not get what they want from the politicians in Washington they simply flash crash or crash the stock market and steal. The elitists are holding this country and much of the world hostage by controlling monetary policy.

  7. pelucheven says:

    this is what every one needs to do, get them down for the count and get a declaratory judgement. this is good in every state. I just wonder how he got the judge not to move his RESPA CLAIM TO FEDERAL COURT, DID HE FILE ON REGULAR STATE COURT?????

  8. debi J says:

    I love it! Does that really work with the QWR? They are trying to put restraining orders on the requests for info. Thank God judges are getting mad and quashing them. There may be hope after all. Will be looking forward to more info on this situation. Kudos to the man with the guts and the brain. Debi

  9. Vale says:

    A real ‘feel good’ story! Every one of these banks involved in mortgage fraud should undergo a sheriff sale.

  10. Click here;

    then search the name of your favorite bank or law firm… pretty interesting!

  11. Hell NO - No More Bailouts says:

    For the failure to notify me of the assignment that was filed last year, which reflects a transaction supposedly also from last year, I also should hit Litton and company for the TILA fine. Since 2009, they are supposed to notify you of new assignments.

    • losing my home in florida says:

      last assignment by mortgage by wells fargo was my closing 2006???? mine was sold to a trust per welss fargo

    • excellent point. forgot about that one. I think it is time to put together a guide on how to hit the banks for violations of the law, get judgments on the fees owed, and how to collect and foreclose on them…

      this is gonna b fun!


      • Larry says:

        I am as well in a situation where I have filed a motion for cost in a previos case which was dismissed by the courts, However the current case is at a stand still by way of a writ of mandamus which I filed back in Novemebr 2010 with the 2nd DCA. If the writ is issued by the 2nd DCA it may become a huge break through for all foreclosure which have been previously dismissed to recover court cost. The 2nd DCA has issued a mandamus response directing the lower tribunal to respond. The case can be reviewed here.

        In addition, 4F you may want to do a write up on the case # 2D10-5604 in your blog as this case addresses this specific issue, and how the courts are boxing litigants into a corner with out a remedy.

        Great points, thanks for sharing,

    • Elaine S says:

      Valuable information! If true ( Help, what specific law do you reference?) This would be an ecxcellent addition to respondents in Florida and elsewhere once foreclosure mills have submitted new assignments just issued for foreclosures by MERS related activities.

      Many assignments I’ve seen in various court cases on this site, are dated 2009 and 2010. Counterclaims against the filing plaintiffs attempting to claim standing to foreclose is in order! And are the assignments legally binding without the TILA? Does the borrower have to sign that they have received it to satisfy the law?

      • Helping Families Save Their Homes Act of 2009 (S.896)

        (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 131 of the Truth in Lending Act
        (15 U.S.C. 1641) is amended by adding at the end the following:
        ‘‘(g) NOTICE OF NEW CREDITOR.—
        ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—In addition to other disclosures required
        by this title, not later than 30 days after the date on which
        a mortgage loan is sold or otherwise transferred or assigned
        to a third party, the creditor that is the new owner or assignee
        of the debt shall notify the borrower in writing of such transfer,
        ‘‘(A) the identity, address, telephone number of the
        new creditor;
        ‘‘(B) the date of transfer;
        ‘‘(C) how to reach an agent or party having authority
        to act on behalf of the new creditor;
        ‘‘(D) the location of the place where transfer of ownership
        of the debt is recorded; and
        ‘‘(E) any other relevant information regarding the new
        ‘‘(2) DEFINITION.—As used in this subsection, the term
        ‘mortgage loan’ means any consumer credit transaction that
        is secured by the principal dwelling of a consumer.’’.
        (b) PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION.—Section 130(a) of the Truth
        in Lending Act (15 U.S.C. 1640(a)) is amended by inserting ‘‘subsection
        (f) or (g) of section 131,’’ after ‘‘section 125,’’.

Leave a Reply