FL Bar on Fraudclosures | Lawyers Obligated by Law to Disclose Felonious Foreclosure Paperwork

Wow. Never expected this to come out of Floriduh…

But first…

It comes at a very interesting time in our state especially with the recent Harvey decision out of the 4th DCA…

Here, because the note at issue is payable to AHMAI, and indorsed in blank, and because Deutsche possessed the original note and filed it with the circuit court, its standing may be established from its status as the note holder, regardless of any recorded assignments. As to Harvey’s argument regarding “questionable signatures,” although Harvey argued this point in her motion for reconsideration, she failed to present any evidence below to support her contention that the signatures were fraudulent. Even if Harvey could prove this, the dispute would be between AHMAI and Deutsche. Importantly, Harvey has never denied that she was in default as to her mortgage payments.

From the footnotes of Harvey…

As to this point, Harvey specifically argued that on April 16, 2009, an assignment of mortgage was executed by Korell Harp, vice president for MERS, as nominee for AHMAI, andTywanna Thomas, assistant secretary for MERS. Harvey stated that on May 6, 2009, an assignment of mortgage in a different and unrelated foreclosure case was executed by Korell Harp; Harp was listed as vice president and assistant secretary for Argent Mortgage Company, LLC. Harvey further stated that in another unrelated foreclosure case, an assignment of mortgage was executed by Cheryl Thomas and Tywanna Thomas; Cheryl Thomas was listed to be vice president of Sand Canyon Corporation and Tywanna Thomas was listed as assistant vice president. Harvey stated that in yet another unrelated foreclosure case, an assignment of mortgage was executed by Korell Harp and Tywanna Thomas. Harvey argued that the signatures of Harp and Tywanna Thomas “appear to be different when compared with the other assignments signed by Ms. Harp and Ms. Thomas,” and “[b]ecause there was a dispute concerning either the facts of the controversy or the inferences to be drawn from those facts, a summary judgment was improper.”

For all who do not know who Thomas and Harp are, they were employees at DOCX along with Linda Green and others that were featured on the 60 Minutes Report on Foreclosure Fraud.

So the ruling above basically states it does not matter if there was fraud upon the court. If you didn’t pay your mortgage, you lose the home. Even if it is the wrong party because the court feels you owe the money to someone so let them figure it out…

Even if Harvey could prove this, the dispute would be between AHMAI and Deutsche.

Full Harvey opinion below…

Now, as for the Florida Bar, they just came out with this…

~

Lawyers obligated to disclose faulty foreclosure paperwork

Some excerpts from The Florida Bar News

Lawyers representing banks and other mortgage service companies must tell the courts if they know of paperwork problems known felonies in their clients’ foreclosure cases, according to the Bar’s Professional Ethics Committee.

The committee, at its June 24 meeting during the Bar’s Annual Convention, voted 20-6 to uphold a Bar staff opinion which advised a lawyer representing a bank in thousands of foreclosure cases.

According to the attorney, the bank used two employees to prepare and review necessary affidavits needed for the foreclosures. One employee always verified the figures in the necessary affidavits and signed the necessary paperwork in the presence of a notary. The second signer relied on a conscientious assistant to verify the figures before signing that he had personally reviewed the figures. Also, those signatures were sometimes notarized when the signer was not present, as required by law. The second signer’s practices extended back for 20 years.

The lawyer wanted to know if the court had to be informed of those irregularities, felonies, since it was unlikely to change the outcome of any pending case. He also inquired whether it made any difference if the case was pending or closed, the stage of pending cases, or that the second signer had reverified information in the improperly notarized forms.

I can’t believe that the lawyer even had the audacity to even ask those questions. And talk about arrogant, “it was unlikely to change the outcome of any pending case.”

Then they surprisingly go on to say…

A Bar staff opinion held it makes no difference whether the case was open or closed or what stage an open case is at in terms of the lawyer’s duty. The opinion said that under Rule 4-3.3 (Candor Toward the Tribunal), the improperly prepared affidavits constitute false evidence, and the lawyer has a duty to disclose that to the courts.

Other rules must also be considered, the opinion said, including Rule 4-1.2(d) which prohibits assisting a client in criminal or fraudulent conduct, Rule 4-3.4(b) which prohibits a lawyer from fabricating evidence or assisting a witness who offers false testimony, Rule 4-8.4(a) which prohibits violating the Rules of Professional Conduct or assisting another to do so, Rule 4-8.4(c) which bars an attorney from conduct that constitutes dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and Rule 4-8.4(d) which prohibits a lawyer from conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.

Wow, that is some strong language… It looks like the foreclosure mills are going to have HUGE problems. The courts are going to be flooded once again due to the massive fraud perpetrated by the banks and their minions.

This is worth repeating…

It makes no difference whether the case was open or closed or what stage an open case is… The lawyer has a duty to disclose that to the courts.

But wait, there’s more…

The staff opinion concluded that, “the inquiring attorney first should attempt to have the client correct the improperly verified and notarized affidavits. The inquiring attorney should advise the client that if the client fails to correct the affidavits, then the inquiring attorney will have to withdraw and will have to reveal the truth to the court. If the client refuses to take the required corrective action, the inquiring attorney will have to reveal the fact that there has been an improperly verified and notarized affidavit filed in each of these cases, whether they are pending or already closed. The inquiring attorney also will have to move to withdraw from further representation of the client in pending cases, where the client refuses to correct the affidavits, while making as minimal a disclosure as necessary when doing so.”

I’ll tell you what, this is going to be fun. Once an attorney knows of the fraud, they MUST disclose it. So it may be time for a little writing campaign to let the attorneys know which documents were fraudulent. There are plenty out there to find…

Most affirmed the decision to follow the law…

Some quotes from the members…

“I strongly urge against watering down this opinion,” said committee member Ana Maria Martinez. “I understand the practical problem, but we can’t approve lying for 20 years.

Added committee member Deborah A’Hearn: “Anything other than affirming the opinion, as is, is the functional equivalent of suborning perjury. We shouldn’t make allowances regardless of the practical problems. It is never OK to lie.

But some members disagreed…

“I thought the [staff] opinion assumed a little too much and went a little too far,” said committee member D. Culver “Skip” Smith, who voted against the final motion.

He noted the committee didn’t have any of the affidavits in question, and it was unclear whether anything was wrong with them other than the affidavit that the signer had personal knowledge of the information in the affidavit.

“It seems to me the opinion quickly assumed this qualified as ‘false evidence,’” Smith said. “The rule talks about a lawyer making a false statement of law or fact. This is not what this is. The staff opinion just assumed it should be false evidence, even if the only thing untrue in it was a notarization statement.

Hey Skippy. Looks like “false evidence” to me. Have you read the notarization statement on these AFFIDAVITS?

They mention words like upon oath, deposes on personal knowledge, sworn, and personally appeared.

Also try reading the AFFIDAVIT itself…

Most contain language such as…

No genuine issue as to any material fact, I am familiar with the books of account and have examined all books, records and documents, I have personal knowledge of the facts contained in this affidavit, Specifically, I have personal knowledge of the facts regarding the sums of money which are due and owing and penalty of perjury…

ALL FALSE STATEMENTS! Which equals FALSE EVIDENCE!

Oh, and by the way, it isn’t just affidavits that were “robo-signed.” And, it wasn’t just one firm that engaged in these practices. Multiple firms also processed allonges, assignments and satisfactions, along with affidavits, in this manner.

If you all would of only listened to us when we brought this to the bars attention in May of 2010…

Palm Beach County Bar Association Professional Committee – Thank You For Listening!

Posted by 4closureFraud on May 19, 2010

Yesterday, May 18, 2010 Foreclosure Hamlet and 4closureFraud had a wonderful opportunity to have lunch with Palm Beach County Bar Association Professional Committee to discuss some of our concerns over what is happening in our courtrooms statewide. How did we earn such an honor? We simply asked… I am pleased to announce that the members … Read more

It was an interesting meeting where we presented concerns on robo-signing and other issues. We aslo gave them our Professional Committee Meeting Outline to show the fraud. They chose to ignore the facts and now we are even deeper into the rabbit hole of fraudclosure.

We even brought the fraud to the bar at their own annual Florida Bar event last year in Boca.

We did our best to warn you, but you did not listen.

Maybe, just maybe the Florida Supreme Court will sort this all out when they rule on the PINO case… Hopefully they do not legalize the fraud.

Info on the PINO case here…

Florida Supreme Court to Address Foreclosure Fraud | ROMAN PINO vs THE BANK OF NEW YORK

Posted by 4closureFraud on April 11, 2011

This is extremely big news all! First some background… Case involving alleged foreclosure fraud headed to Florida Supreme Court A South Florida homeowner who is fighting a mortgage foreclosure could end up reshaping state law. An appeals court on Wednesday asked the Florida Supreme Court to consider Roman Pino’s case as a matter of “great … Read more

And here…

Enrique Nieves to Argue High-Stakes Foreclosure Case Before Fla. Supreme Court

Posted by 4closureFraud on July 15, 2011

Newcomer to Argue High-Stakes Foreclosure Case Before Fla. Supreme Court As a relative novice in the legal profession, Ice Legal senior associate Enrique Nieves III is prepping for his biggest case and his first appearance before the Florida Supreme Court. At 31, Nieves is assigned to argue a case that may decide the fate of … Read more

All we ever asked was for the banks and their attorneys to FOLLOW THE LAW. No free houses, no windfalls for the homeowner, no debt forgiveness.

JUST FOLLOW THE LAW…

Because once we lose that, we lose society as we know it…

And for all you naysayers out there that think that this does not effect you, you are mistaken.

Once the rule of law is gone, there is nothing left…

See you all in the trenches…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Florida Bar Ethics Opinion Jan. 11, 2011 Approved by the Fla. Bar’s Proffessional Ethics Committee June 24, 2011 Fraud and Documents

[scribd id=60269200 key=key-pozb581ylpocibdnc8o mode=list]

JACQUELINE HARVEY v. DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY

[scribd id=58982647 key=key-21hpxbgjsjzdyo6uohh4 mode=list]

Professional Committee Meeting Outline

[scribd id=31618412 key=key-19fqo3nvev2j5k85bj2i mode=list]

Professional Committee Meeting Agenda

[scribd id=31617141 key=key-ra5g9zpwgy8ecioacv8 mode=list]

Supreme Court Notice to Invoke Jurisdiction ROMAN PINO vs the BANK of NEW YORK
[scribd id=52790852 key=key-1wmobcp1w483n19lzjm6 mode=list]

Supreme Court Acknowledgment Roman Pino vs the Bank of New York

[scribd id=52790816 key=key-1maisa9r1ewfjt3nqrch mode=list]

Supreme Court High Profile Order Roman Pino vs the Bank of New York

[scribd id=52790821 key=key-19ll61xrccdzq4tqls0p mode=list]

FL 4th DCA Pino v. The Bank of New York Mellon Opinion

[scribd id=48104119 key=key-5q6gicm1gtwe9nt9i7w mode=list]

FL 4th DCA Pino v. The Bank of New York Mellon Oral Arguments Transcript

[scribd id=48104905 key=key-c4gp9vcf8bisfcj4ucb mode=list]

Comments
10 Responses to “FL Bar on Fraudclosures | Lawyers Obligated by Law to Disclose Felonious Foreclosure Paperwork”
  1. withament says:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPXGeY9bc3Y Fact is the Paper starts being FAKE When the United States engage in what States are Prohibited from doing See US Const Art 1 Sec 8 and 10. ( Individual States are NOT ALLOWED to do it BUT the States Unted that’s OK ?? ) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jPXGeY9bc3Y

  2. simon l says:

    ditto that, ivent and Fury.

    My friend in Chicago, Illinois filed federal lawsuit 2009cv02115 “Arriaga et al v Wells Fargo Bank, NA et al” in 2009 after Wells filed foreclosure in 2008, on a refi mortgage they rescinded 8 months beforehand. There was a MERS affidavit of assignment recorded on the same day they appeared to contest the retaliatory foreclosure filing.

    Wells caused so much financial damage and losses that the damages are in excess of the original loan amount. Draper & Kramer originated the refi of thie 15yr home in 2005 based on a false lender appraisal (a copy of which was never sent when requested by my friends), telling my friends that it was in thier best interest to combine the existing mortgage and personal loan – which resulted in a “savings” of a whopping $100 a month while extending thier 20 yr mortgage to 30 years, and adding $11,000 of closing costs, while the home’s true value was only 1/2 of the appraised value, causing instant negative equity of over $100K at execution. The only legal tender that changed hands was a money order that my friends needed to bring to the closing table, because they needed to pay $220 because the loan funds were short. When they tried to sell a year or so later, real estate brokers told them that the home was not worth even half the mortgage amount. On top of it all, it was discovered that the previous mortgagee (Wells Fargo!) had never properly released the previous mortgage in the land record when the refinance “funds” were disbursed..

    Once they found out that they had been defrauded into accepting an unconscionable refi, and the servicer Wells also refused to provide copies of the appraisal, proof of payment of the previous mortgage, and refi disclosures that were missing, they rescinded by written notice and offering to arrange repayment. Wells Fargo and Draper ignored the notice, and threatened foreclosure even though the mortgage was current. Three months after notice to rescind, my friends stopped paying (under TILA’s forfeiture provision, they were not liable for any amount because the lender failed to claim a proceeds amount to rescind). Wells Fargo filed foreclosure, preventing sale of the home even at market value and causing credit damage and the instant loss of a military employment contract, among many other things. So my friends filed Federal complaint for fraud, failure to rescind, and 6 other violations. They did not defend the Cook County foreclosure in the Fed complaint, but they allege that the servicer’s foreclosure filing is a retaliatory TILA rescission rights violation. My friends are necessarily pro se, and there are 121 docket entries in the Fed case.
    The foreclosure is in limbo, and despite my friends’ answer and defenses in that case, interrogatories and requests for production, and allegation of the servicer’s lack of standing, it has been 3 years and Wells has never responded to the answer, and the Cook County judge won’t dismiss the case, which causes continuous financial credit damage – basically, Wells is being allowed to keep the case in limbo – and my friends’ lives have been on hold and they have sold most of thier assets just to keep up with thier bills that skyrocketed (payments doubled and even tripled when interest rates and insurance costs went up) when their credit rating went bad from the foreclosure complaint. Wells is hoping that they will give up and file bankruptcy – which would enable Wells to get the property despite the frauds.

    So sad – they had perfect credit record and one credit card with a balance of $400 and a credit limit of $4500 – and that creditor closed the account without warning because of that foreclosure filing – and 2 months later thier heating system broke down and they couldn’t even get a loan to fix it. They are fighting this tooth and nail as they worked so hard all thier lives and while other kids had birthday parties thier kids had none for the sake of paying bills on time with thier hard-earned money so they could have something in life. I hope they kick Wells Fargo arse and become millionaires over it. My friends say they don’t count on winning against Wells and it’s crew, but want to be a pain in the arse and give the public knowledge so maybe those who have money for attorneys will take Wells down. Bankruptcy, they say, will come only after they can fight no more.

    I heard that Wells Fargo pays it’s attorney thousands just to file one motion – there are many in both cases and Wells probably paid in excess of the loan amount just to try to take these peoples’ home – well, why not? If they can get the house, they can get another sucker into a mortgage under MERS to keep the money wheel rolling. In the Fed complaint, a copy of the appraisal was finally revealed, showing a monthly rental income of $22,000/year – FRAUD! On top of appraising the home at double it’s true value, Draper had also inflated my friends’ income on the appraisal.

    My friends were given a loan designed to fail if they ever needed to sell the home (even a week later) for the mortgage amount. In the case of a reduction in salary or sickness of a child (surgeries for one of thier children were the reason for the personal loan, and Draper knew this child may need further surgery). They were lied to – they owed less than the true value of the home on the old mortgage – adding the personal loan was not in thier best interest but Draper didn’t care because he was paid in full by selling that overvalued loan to a securitizer on the day of execution.

    I hope somebody outlaws all MERS mortgages. Without MERS, it would have been impossible for such mortgages to exist.

  3. Fury says:

    this begs the question…
    what about the Felonious Foreclosure judges and others who leave their jobs and start working for the
    Felonious Foreclosure mills and Felonious F/c PhotoShop Paperwork Factories?

  4. DC says:

    What a joke? Again and again we see these type of announcements. OF COURSE THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO REPORT AB– USE AND FRAUD, IT’S IN THEIR OATH THEY TOOK AND THEIR CODE OF ETHICS!!! They jsut come up with excuse of “nobody told us”, yes they did every state has a code of conduct for judges and attorneys, if they have the slighest notion that something is wrong they have a DUTY to report it. It so frustrating because the leagl profession polices itself and they either are afraid or just cover each others asses. For example, opposing attorneys, those representing homeowers, should be reporting teh misconduct of the banks attorneys but I bet they rarely do. Same can be said for judges, any attorney who witnesses a judge committ misconduct has the obligation and duty to report it.

    • lizinsarasota says:

      In 2008 the Florida Bar published a continuing eduction course titled “Hard Times: Foreclosures, Bankruptcy, Offers of Judgment, MERS, and Such.” The course, described as “intermediate level,” was offered for 1 hour of general credit, and 5 hours for real estate law credit.
      The course was given at the Tampa Mariott in January, 2009. The Shapiro & Fishman attorney who sued me for foreclosure in 2006 attended the course (I got that from the FL Bar). In this course was a list: Max Gardner’s Top 200 Signs You’ve Got a False Document (Morgage Affidavits & Assignments & Endorsements). The financial affidavit this attorney filed in my case hit on eight of the signs, including the #1 sign, which was the location of Lender Processing Services’ main campus in Mendota Heights, Minn. Also included was the #76 sign, the actual robosigner herself: Dory Goebel.
      So, you tell me: how the hell can this attorney at Shapiro & Fishman get all stupid and sleepy-eyed when I come to her and she “receives information” from me about Dory Goebel and – besides this list – the two major federal court cases where Dory’s affidavits have been called a “sham” and a “farce” and “fraud on the court”??
      http://www.scribd.com/doc/60281594/Max-Gardner-s-Top-200-Signs-You-ve-Got-a-False-Document-as-published-by-the-Florida-Bar-in-2008
      How is this attorney going to wiggle out of NOT reporting the fraudulent affidavit in my case to the court?

  5. AS says:

    If a Bank benefits from forged documents they certainly are not a victim of fraud, they are the benefactor of it. Why would they care if the doc’s were possibly illegal? The consumer would appear to be the victim.
    So Fraud by Banks is legal in the South!

    Is this the new version of the Civil war in 2011? The North Judiciary verses the South Judiciary! It is all about States Rights since Florida and many state AG’s which appear to be supporting the banks are in the Bible Belt and their representatives regularly spout the States Rights rhetoric.
    Some northern states Judiciary appear to be concerned about fraud committed on consumers by huge corporations and some of the southern Judiciary is not concerned with Fraud on consumers that leaves the r people many who are black homeless! Is this the American way? Just a thought!

    Anyone can research land records for assignments and power of attorney. It might be interesting to find out if the Law Firms for the Servicer also was the same law firm for the Foreclosure Mills representing and if they were given power of attorney to represent the alleged new holder of the note. Is the foreclosure mills attorney involved with LSP or Doxc? There is a website listing the law firms involved with LPS. If they are then is it possible the plaintiff attorney was aware of the alleged forged documents?

    I am glad somewhere the Judges are questioning what appears to be Criminal Acts by the Banks and not endorsing them as what appears to have happened in this case in the Bible Belt.

    Maybe the Harvey’s can appeal. Since this is the Bible Belt maybe the Governors in those states could ask citizens to have a mass prayer day to stop banks and attorneys from allegedly defrauding consumers.

  6. lvent says:

    That should mean an end to illegal fraudclosures. I was reading the Illinois Foreclosure Law yesterday which clearly points out exactly what they did and what to look for. The Judges know. Illinois Foreclosure Law: http://mortgage-home-loan-bank-fraud.com/legal/defense_of_foreclosure.htm

    • lvent says:

      The link is not working. Not surprised. Yahoo search it. THE LAW CLEARLY STATES THAT: THE RECORDS OF THE LOAN MUST BE INTRODUCED OTHERWISE IT IS HEARSAY AND INCOMPETENT, COUNSEL SHOULD CHALLENGE ANY SUCH BANK TESTIMONY OR AFFADAVITS. THAT THEY ARE THE OWNER OF THE LOAN. THIS IS WHY FRAUDCLOSURES ARE IN LIMBO IN ILLINOIS. I read that it is illegal for these bastards to file a foreclosure at all if they DO NOT HAVE CLEAR TITLE. YET I HAVE 2 FORECLOSURE LIS PENDS ON 2 PROPERTIES AND BOTH HAVE CLOUDY TITLES. THE PLAINTIFF ATTORNEY TOLD ME THEY CAN FRAUDCLOSE WITH A CLOUDY TITLE. WTF??????

      • lvent says:

        I WANT CLEAR TITLE TO BOTH OF MY PROPERTIES. THESE CROOKS COMMITTED MASSIVE FRAUD IN MY NAME AND I HAVE THE UNDENIABLE_ PROOF_.

    • Fury says:

      IVENT,
      they all know. we all know about the horrendous fraud that has been committed.

      it will have to stop soon or there will be a revolution. i mean it. i hear it everyday. people are suffering.
      very few elected officials have done anything about it.

      the People will do something it, pretty soon. those in charge have done a lousy job.

Leave a Reply

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