Abigail Field | Mortgage Servicers Gratuitously Screw Up Foreclosures By Using Obsolete Scans

Mortgage Servicers Gratuitously Screw Up Foreclosures By Using Obsolete Scans

By | August 10, 2011

By now I imagine that everyone recognizes a pandemic of legally flawed foreclosures has infected America’s land records. But not everyone realizes how deep the greed and “corner cutting” goes. For example, a significant percentage of the flawed proceedings tainting our hundreds-year-healthy system of tracking land ownership may reflect nothing more than mortgage servicers’ unwillingness to get the original promissory note, mortgage and assignments from the vault. That is, using the real, accurate documents (and complying with the rules and law) is too expensive.

(Sorry officer, I recognize I was going 80 in a 35 mile an hour zone. It was costing me too much money to drive the speed limit. Time is money.)

Using the real documents is a hassle because the vault often isn’t at the mortgage servicer’s, but at a “document custodian” such as Deutsche Bank. So instead of getting the originals, the evidence I discuss below indicates that mortgage servicers print out the scanned images of notes that are already in their databases, the images the servicers received to start servicing the loans. These scans were typically made before the notes were endorsed, which means that the servicer is giving the court a printout that is not the “true and certified” copy of the note that the mortgage servicer is claiming it is and the rules require it to be.

Be sure to check out the rest of Abigail’s in-depth report here…

~

4closureFraud.org

Comments
20 Responses to “Abigail Field | Mortgage Servicers Gratuitously Screw Up Foreclosures By Using Obsolete Scans”
  1. Ali says:

    In addition to all that they forged and my signiture and noterized it at closing. I know I didn’t sign it ,my husband was the Vet, and later our (so called Att.) called and said my husband should “quit claim the property to him self and me as that would protect us from any lilibility as it would be “marible property’. I looked this lawyer up and he worked for ticor, Stewart, and is now with Fidelity. So he was in on the scam right out of the gate. You are right Ivent, its all in the originationand the more I look the more I find. I found an unrecorded release deed and called my Recorders office and indeed (pardon the pun) it seems to be the last one. Now I only have MERS to contend with. So I ordered a whole new set of recorded papers from the Recorders office so I can have a clean set, all in order to look at.

  2. Ali says:

    I actually got down to the bottom of the origination fraud this week. I found a credit report saying there were two loans taken out on tthe same closing date, one w/Washingtonton Mutual and one where the broker became the lender and assigned it to MERS as nom. This was a VA loan no less. The Washington Miutual loan on the credit report was “paid” and later when I got my papers from the recorders office I found “Release of Morgage, Satisfaction of Mortgage , final escow disclosure, wet, blue ink note, and at the bottom was the broker’s name as the lender, they used Wells Fargo to release the “First Morgage Corp.” using “First American Title Co. to do the paperwork. So wer paid on our loan for three years and put 37,000 $ down and know BOA is claiming the loan on behalf of Countrywide! My head is spinning although sometimes I have a few moment of clarity and see what really happened. I tried to look up the previus owner and there nothing at the recorders office till we bought the house, maybe there was not a clear title to begin with!? Or maybe they just didn’t want to fuck with the feds over a VA loan, they sent us the mortgage back. My dining room table is filled with paper, some with bar codes, some in blank with illedasle signiture. Had I not found this site I would be in deep shit.

  3. Gary J says:

    Wow! I have been in foreclosure court four times over the past year.I recently discovered that there are two “corrective” assignments that were done by the law firm representing Lasalle bank.The original lender was First Franklin,who is no longer in business.Bank of America is the servicer,and have denied me three times for the HAMP program,and twice for modification.They are currently reviewing another workout program for me.If they had the right to foreclose,it would have been done by now.I can’t afford an attorney,so one was appointed to me.She says she can’t help me other than the foreclosure or short sale.I can’t believe this crap! I am fighting this,and have every document since day one.Robo-signers and all.It’s not going to be pretty in court next month when I accuse the law firm of fraud and forgery.They made another “corrective” assignment last month from MERS as nominee for First Franklin.Get this,the last page is an “acknowledgement” signed in California.Are you F*cking kidding me? What is your outlook on this situation?Please let me know.Keep on fighting! Thank you.

  4. Javagold says:

    we had our mortgage loan from BOA ane went directly thru BOA , however we were never told that the original investor is/was Freddie Mac……is the origination fraud that you speak of ?????……….i checked the clerks office and all that shows in the recording by BOA and no others recording over the past 5 years……..can we fight BOA for these reasons

    PS all correspondance we receive from BOA in the past 3-6 months now states that Freddie Mac is the investor, when they never said a word the past 5 years and actually told us many times over the phone that they do have to give us that information when we asked for it………seems strange that its now included in all the papers they send to us and i am sure there is some fraud/sneaky reason why

    • lvent says:

      Javagold,,,,In your recordings at the Origination of your loan, is there a deed conveyed to you??? after that occured is there a mortgage and an assignment of Mortgage or a Collateral Assignment under Land Trust aggreement with doc numbers that match that deed doc #?? In mine there was a mortgage recorded attached to nothing (look for a prior doc #) and no assignment recorded….They never secured the collateral lien in 18 years…. My recorders office told me because of that my house is paid for….The statutute limitations in my state is 12 years to properly record and assign a lien..the recorders office told my and my husband, we can live in our house, sell it or do whatever we want with it….They actually hid the Origination fraud from me under an old pin and gave me a new pin after the second bank came along and released the mortgage to me and my husband though they did not tell me this……LOL!!!!!!!..The attorney at the recorders office gave me my old pin# so I could get to my deed which is LIEN FREE……I HAVE HAD THE DEED WITH TITLE INSURANCE ATTACHED STAMPED PAID FROM THE RECORDER’S OFFICE SINCE THE ORIGINATION….My recorders office knows all about the mortgage fraud that was rampant in the mortgage industry and talks about on their home page……..These crooks are going down!!! Best of Luck to you getting to your LIEN FREE DEED at your recorders office!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  5. Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny says:

    This is an important “other side of the coin” argument relating to why originals, or properly authenticated endorsed copies, or endorsed originals are not submitted as exhibits to the complaint.

    The fact of plaintiff not producing an original or endorsed original does not mean that they can’t, only that they haven’t/didn’t.

    If you are hanging your entire case based on the assumption that they can’t produce an original you may end up having your hat handed to you on the way out of the courtroom. I suggest you look for, and include, other legitimate and powerful arguments and defenses (and counter claims, both mandatory and permissive).

    • lvent says:

      STUPENDOUS MAN,,,,,I am talking about the ORIGINATION OF THE LOAN……..THE FIRST LOAN, THE LOAN YOU MADE WHEN YOU FIRST BOUGHT YOUR HO– USE..DO NOT BE DECEIVING PEOPLE……THE ORIGINAL MORTGAGE AND NOTE STAMPED PAID BECA– USE THE SECOND BANK CAME ALONG AND CANCELLED THAT ORIGINAL LOAN…………..THE FBI TOLD ME TO ASK CHASE FOR MY PAID ORIGINALS……….WHAT ARE THE CHANCES DO YOU THINK THAT CHASE HAS THOSE ORIGINALS STAMPED PAID??????……….THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE THEM,,,,,,IS SHOULD………….I HAVE A COPY OF A RELEASE OF MORTGAGE PUBLICLY RECORDED BY CHASE AS SUCCESSOR AND MERGER TO MARGARETTEN MORTGAGE 5 YEARS AFTER THEY MERGERED..AND THEY NEVER TOLD ME…CHASE RELEASED THE PAID MORTGAGE AND NOTE TO ME AND MY HUSBAND AND ALL OF OUR HEIRS BUT I NEVER RECEIVED THE PAID NOTE AND MORTGAGE FROM CHASE…..I CALL THAT PROOF OF DECEPTIVE PRACTICES………………STOP THE LIES!!!!!!……………….DEATH TO FORECLOSUREGATE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    • eif says:

      OK (and greetings) … where else to come but here for education on endorsements.

      I spent some time reading definitions on the Net and haven’t yet found specifically what endorsements mean in this context.

      Only that they are signatures providing some authority for some transaction.

      Help please, am appreciatively attaching this query to the present post and also asking All here in this forum … will welcome illumination as to purpose and practice and specifics of what endorsements look like, how to find, etc..

      And sending best wishes,
      elders.in.foreclosre@gmail.com

      • Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny says:

        If you need legal definitions go to the law, and to legal dictionary/ies.

        Federal UCC Article 3:

        http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/ucc.table.html

        This is from Black’s 8th:

        INDORSE
        indorse,vb. To sign (a negotiable instrument), usu. on the back, either to accept responsibility
        for paying an obligation memorialized by the instrument or to make the instrument payable to
        someone other than the payee. — Also spelled endorse.

        INDORSEE
        indorsee (in-dor-see). A person to whom a negotiable instrument is transferred by
        indorsement. — Also spelled endorsee.
        indorsee in due course.An indorsee who, in the ordinary course of business, acquires a
        negotiable instrument in good faith for value, before its maturity, and without knowledge of its
        dishonor.

        INDORSEMENT
        indorsement,n.1. The placing of a signature, sometimes with an additional notation, on the
        back of a negotiable instrument to transfer or guarantee the instrument or to acknowledge payment.
        2. The signature or notation itself. — Also spelled endorsement. — indorse,vb.

        “The clever indorser can subscribe his or her name under a variety of magic phrases. The
        Code specifies the legal effect of some of these phrases. Qualified indorsements (‘without
        recourse’) limit the liability of the indorser if the instrument is dishonored. Restrictive
        indorsements such as ‘for deposit only,’ ‘pay any bank,’ and the like set the terms for further
        negotiation of the instrument. Their main purpose is to prevent thieves and embezzlers from
        cashing checks.” 2 James J. White & Robert S. Summers, Uniform Commercial Code § 16-7, at
        92–93 (4th ed. 1995).

        accommodation indorsement.An indorsement to an instrument by a third party who acts as
        surety for another party who remains primarily liable. See ACCOMMODATION PAPER. [Cases:
        Bills and Notes 236. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit § 63.]

        anomalous indorsement.See irregular indorsement.

        blank indorsement.An indorsement that names no specific payee, thus making the instrument
        payable to the bearer and negotiable by delivery only. UCC § 3-205(b). — Also termed
        indorsement in blank; general indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 188, 288. C.J.S. Bills and
        Notes; Letters of Credit § 153.]

        collection indorsement.See restrictive indorsement.

        conditional indorsement.An indorsement that restricts the instrument in some way, as by
        limiting how the instrument can be paid or transferred; an indorsement giving possession of the
        instrument to the indorsee, but retaining title until the occurrence of some condition named in the
        indorsement. • Wordings that indicate this type of indorsement are “Pay to Brad Jones when he
        becomes 18 years of age” and “Pay to Brigitte Turner, or order, unless before payment I give you
        notice to the contrary.” — Also termed restricted indorsement; restrictive indorsement. Cf. special
        indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 190, 199, 290. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§
        154–155.]
        full indorsement.See irregular indorsement, special indorsement.

        general indorsement.See blank indorsement.

        indorsement in blank.See blank indorsement.

        indorsement in full.See special indorsement.

        indorsement without recourse.See qualified indorsement.

        irregular indorsement.An indorsement by a person who signs outside the chain of title and
        who therefore is neither a holder nor a transferor of the instrument. • An irregular indorser is
        generally treated as an accommodation party. UCC § 3-205(c). — Also termed anomalous
        indorsement; full indorsement. See ACCOMMODATION PARTY. [Cases: Bills and Notes 191,
        294. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§ 24, 156.]

        qualified indorsement.An indorsement that passes title to the instrument but limits the
        indorser’s liability to later holders if the instrument is later dishonored. • Typically, a qualified
        indorsement is made by writing “without recourse” or “sans recourse” over the signature. — Also

        termed indorsement without recourse. UCC § 3-415(b). See WITHOUT RECOURSE. [Cases:
        Bills and Notes 293. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit § 160.]

        restricted indorsement.See conditional indorsement.

        restrictive indorsement.An indorsement that includes a condition (e.g., “pay Josefina Cardoza
        only if she has worked 8 full hours on April 13”) or any other language restricting further
        negotiation (e.g., “for deposit only”). — Also termed collection indorsement. See conditional
        indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 190, 199, 290. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§
        154–155.]

        special indorsement.An indorsement that specifies the person to receive payment or to whom
        the goods named by the document must be delivered. UCC § 3-205(a). — Also termed
        indorsement in full; full indorsement. Cf. conditional indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 189,
        289. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit § 152.]

        trust indorsement.An indorsement stating that the payee becomes a trustee for a third person
        (e.g., “pay Erin Ray in trust for Kaitlin Ray”); a restrictive indorsement that limits the instrument
        to the use of the indorser or another person.

        unauthorized indorsement.An indorsement made without authority, such as a forged
        indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 239, 279. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§ 29,
        150–151.]

        unqualified indorsement.An indorsement that does not limit the indorser’s liability on the
        paper. • It does not, for example, include the phrase “without recourse.” [Cases: Bills and Notes
        281, 287, 293. C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§ 147, 160.]

        unrestrictive indorsement.An indorsement that includes no condition or language restricting
        negotiation. — Also termed unrestricted indorsement. [Cases: Bills and Notes 190, 199, 290.
        C.J.S. Bills and Notes; Letters of Credit §§ 154–155.]

        INDORSER
        indorser. A person who transfers a negotiable instrument by indorsement; specif., one who
        signs a negotiable instrument other than as maker, drawer, or acceptor. — Also spelled endorser.
        accommodation indorser.An indorser who acts as surety

      • eif says:

        Thank you, immensely helpful, both in how it pertains to ‘assignments’ etc. and in general as to “authority flow” and inter-actor authenticity among other things, If I gather correctly.

        Helps explain why often it is important to be able to trace arrival of instruments to intended addressees etc. (just an example). Again, super help; I needed some illumination on who does the endorsing and where. Lights up some dark areas as to agency relations.

        elders.in.foreclosure@gmail.com

      • lvent says:

        eif, don’t let them drive you nuts!!!!! Find the Origination fraud….!!!!!

    • Hell No, No More Bail-OUTS says:

      Many people are failing to investigate the information on their mortgage and NOTE.

      Everyone needs to verify if the named lender exists. Do this CAREFULLY. For example, with loans that identify the LENDER as “America’s Wholesale Lender” and further state the LENDER is a CORPORATION under the laws of the State of New York, a simple google will get you to the NY SOS site where you can type in the name of the LENDER. For this example ‘Corporation’, you will see that a company was indeed registered in that name in that state on 12-16-2008.

      Now if you are quick to decide that you found the corporation did exist, you have just committed a bone-head error. Your mortgage documents are from an EARLIER DATE, if you have one with this “America’s Wholesale Lender” that was supposedly a NY CORPORATION.

      A DIFFERENT group set this particular Corporation up in NY. This is but one example of corporations that can not be foreclosing. The servicers attempt to assign these mortgages FRAUDULENTLY.

      Other cases involve original ‘LENDERS’ that have gone bankrupt. If your lender went bankrupt without having already assigned your note and mortgage (or Deed of Trust), then the BK Trustee for that LENDER would need to agree to the transfer of assets that belong to the BK-controlled estate. False documents are being created routinely for such loans also.

      Get the word out to others to check up on the named LENDER.

      If you have a fraudulent lender, report the situation to the FTC. I reported my AWL loan to them already.

      If you have any type of CountryWIde REMIC involved in your mortgage foreclosure (typically with BNY-Mellon as trustee), report the informaiton you have to the NY AG’s office.

      IF you have a mortgage that could be in the investments that AIG is suing over, call the law firm that is suing BNY-Mellon on behalf of AIG.

      • lvent says:

        INVESTIGATE AND FIND THE ORIGINATION FRAUD……I AM TALKING ABOUT THE DAY YOU CLOSED ON YOUR HO– USE..SEE WHAT IS RECORDED AT THE RECORDERS OFFICE……..DID THE ORIGINAL “LENDER” SECURE THE COLATERAL LIEN FOR THEMSELVES BY PROPERLY ASSIGNING AND RECORDING THE MORTGAGE AFTER THEY CONVEYED THE DEED TO YOU???. THE LAW REQUIRES THIS…………….SEE WHAT THE SECOND BANKER DID WHEN THEY RELEASED THE MORTGAGE TO YOU AND YOUR HEIRS….DO YOU HAVE THE ORIGINAL PAID OFF MORTGAGE AND NOTE STAMPED PAID FROM ORIGINATION……..????? YOU SHOULD HAVE THAT IN YOUR POSSESSION……..THERE SHOULD BE A RECORD OF EVERY TRANSACTION MADE ON YOUR LOAN RECORDED PUBLICLY………..THEY CANNOT FIX THE ORIGINATION FRAUD AT THIS LATE DATE……..IF THEY DID NOT SECURE THE COLLATERAL LIEN AT ORIGINATION, AND THEY SOLD AN INTEREST IN YOUR NOTE TO ANYONE, THAT IS SECURITES FRAUD……..THEY SOLD AN INTEREST IN AN UNSECURED NOTE AS A SECURITY INTEREST……WITHOUT THE MORTGAGE……..THAT IS FRAUD…….AND IT WAS MASSIVE……….THEY LOST TRACK OF WHO OWNS YOUR MORTGAGE AT ORIGINATION……….

      • lvent says:

        BECA– USE OF ALL OF THAT RAMPANT FRAUD, NOT ONLY SHOULD THEY BE FORCED TO RESCIND THE LOAN AND GIVE CLEAR TITLE BACK TO THE HOMEOWNER BUT THEY COLLECTED MONEY WHEN THEY LOST TRACK OF WHO OWNS THE MORTGAGE……..SO, THESE SWINDLERS AND FRAUDSTERS NOW OWE US ALOT OF FREAKING MONEY………..NOT INCLUDING THE BAILOUT MONEY THEY STOLE FROM ALL OF US……

      • Bobbi Swann says:

        @ Hell No…. – that is exactly what I did in my case and it turned out that the lender was NOT registered with MY state to conduct business and then they tried to “assign” the mortgage to one of their subsidiaries, which of course, is registered with the state. They sent me a letter telling me that the mortgage has now been assigned and I sent back a request for PROOF of the RECORDED assignment. They won’t send it, of course, because that would put them in the hot seat of outright fraud! And the letter they sent me telling me that it was assigned means absolutely nothing. I want PROOF that it was recorded and as of this date, the county recorder’s office has no such document of record. No reply to my request but more recently they “charged off” my mortgage and now some collection agency has the debt. Now I have sent a request for an investigation into the “validity” of the debt under the FCRA (Fair Credit Reporting Act) to this collection agency. No response to date. Oh, and since they could not produce the “original wet ink Note” at the foreclosure which is required under Florida foreclosure statutes, they cannot validate the debt either. But, still waiting….

    • eif says:

      Greetings, and

      on your interesting point that they CAN bring forth documents, only one factor but a real one is that many homes that on the merits would not be lost are lost due to the stress of court procedures.

      The court is extremely overworked and under staffed, plus what is going on is real time CLE (continuing legal education). The longer the “plaintiff” lawyer waits to give the evidence, the more legal fees the lawyer collects, billable hours wise and otherwise..

      Of course that is their profession, and they have rights to fees, but by the time the homeowner is filed against there is an army of interested persons, a battalion of ‘grinding axes’ or fire-irons, for career and other reasons, against the homeowner.

      What to do? Even if one is as in the film “mad as hell” or living in it.

      Reading on, and sending best wishes,
      elders.in.foreclosure@gmail.com

      • eif says:

        Correction to the above:

        Meant “court proceedings” not “court procedures.”

        In other words, meant to reference the time-line not the rules (in this particular instance, except at-a slant since the rules aid the resourced).

        The time-line can be shrunken or stretched by those with the means to do so, and the resources and stamina for daily living.

        So generally agreeing that it might take a while before certain documents emerge. Interested in other and further views, and once again thanks for the forum.

  6. lvent says:

    What about the ORIGINAL MORTGAGE AND NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATION OF THE “LOAN” THAT WE SHOULD HAVE IN OUR POSSESSION STAMPED PAID IN FULL WHEN THE SECOND BANK CAME ALONG AND SOLD US OUR HO– USE FOR A NOMINAL FEE??? WHY DO WE NOT HAVE THOSE ORIGINAL DOCS IN OUR POSSESSION?????????? THE PONZI SCHEMERS DESTROYED THEM…..CASE CLOSED…………….RESCIND THE FAKE LOANS, CLEAR TITLE GOES TO THE HOMEOWNERS…

    • AliceN.Wunderland says:

      Right on Ivent. What about those original stamped paid in full docs. They aren’t sending them because they don’t have them. They record robo-signed docs at the courthouse, if they record them at all. Why won’t the pretender lenders provide even copies of the Notes, instead telling us we have no right to see them or to know who owns the loan.

      Why don’t the pretender lenders sign their letters. Only a company committing fraud would NOT allow a person to sign a letter. What is wrong with people today that they can’t see something right in front of their eyes or as in these cases, not in front of their eyes.

      I live by the rule, document everything. In this day and age, nothing is documented by the banks, nothing. No one will give their name, no one will sign a letter.

      The SEC site is interesting tho, they have all the names and numbers of everyone involved in the securitization scheme. All the managers of these funds are proudly on display for the world to see, quite an interesting read,,,the SEC website.

      • lvent says:

        Thanks Alice!!!! There is alot of deception out there about what the ORIGINATION FRAUD actually is………………

Leave a Reply