BAM! | Phillips vs US Bank – Homeowners are 3rd Party Beneficiaries of HAMP (MUST READ)

JUDGE DENNIS BLACKMON NAILS US BANK IN GEORGIA ON HAMP, WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE

From the opinion…

“Sometimes, only courts of law stand to protect the taxpayer. Somewhere, someone has to stand up. Well, sometimes is now, and the place is the Great State of Georgia. The Defendant’s Motion is hereby Denied”

“The United States Government paid taxpayer dollars to the largest of our financial institutions, and to European Union Banks, in order to prop up those poorly run organizations. Twenty Billion of those dollars were handed over to the defendant, U.S. Bank.”

“The HAMP guidelines require U.S. Bank to perform modification services for all mortgage loans its services. Otis Philips applied to modify his mortgage with U.S. Bank. U..S. Bank denied the request, without numbers, figures, or explanation, reasoning, comparison to the guidelines, or anything.”

“A cynical Judge might believe that this entire motion to dismiss is a desperate attempt to avoid the discovery period, where U.S. Bank would have to tell Mr. Phillips how his financial situation did not qualify him for a modification. Or, perhaps he was qualified, yet didn’t receive the modification, in violation of U.S. Bank’s Service Participation Agreement (SPA).”

“A cynical judge might think that, if the guidelines clearly prevented Mr Phillips from getting his modification, the US Banks would have trotted out theat fact in matematic equations, pie charts, and bar graphs, all on 8 by 10 glossy photo paper, with circles and arrows and paragraphs on the back explaining each winning number.”

“U.S. Bank’s silence on this issue might heighten the suspicions of such a cynical jurist.”

“I, on the other hand, am sure that nothing of the sort could be true. Maybe US Bank no longer has any of the $20 billion dollars left, and so their lack or written explanation might be attributed to some kind of ink reduction program to save money. I’m sure there is a perfectly reasonable explanation for why US  Bank will not print out the ONE page of figures that show that MR Phillip’s financials compared to the HAMP guidelines to clear this all up.”

“Clearly, U.S. Bank cannot take the money, contract with our government to provide a a service to the taxpayer, violate that agreement, and then say no one on earth can sue them for it. That is not the law in Georgia. In fact, since no administrative review is provided in HAMP [which is something you should put in your OCC letter demanding review], the courts are the only recourse.”

Conclusion

“There is no merit to Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, and same is hereby DENIED.”

Judge Dennis Blackmon

Full opinion below…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Phillips vs US Bank

Comments
4 Responses to “BAM! | Phillips vs US Bank – Homeowners are 3rd Party Beneficiaries of HAMP (MUST READ)”
  1. Chris Tucker says:

    Damn! I felt the shockwave from Judge Blackmon’s asswhupping on US Bank all the way up here in Boston.

    Papergate, the Supreme Judicial Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts recently declared that pretty much all bank foreclosures for the past 5 years are void.

    So, yeah, the noose is tightening around the necks of the banksters, albeit not the kind of noose I’d like to see.

  2. These wins are coming from the hard work of good attorneys. I know Mr. Ensign personally, the plaintiff’s attorney and he”s winning the non judicial fight for folks in Georgia and Tennessee. If you want a chance to save your home, then call Peter Ensign’s office, they can truley help! 423-510-0410

  3. papergate says:

    I agree – we need to really acknowledge Judge Dennis Blackmon for his wearing the robe the way it was meant to be worn . . . hope he and Honorable Schack can connect GA to NY (with all states in between)! Honorable Blackmon is also to be duly noted a true man of the law!

  4. Michael Olenick says:

    Sounds like Judge Schack might have a new colleague. Their accents are probably very different, and given the political makeup of their state’s their political views might be different. But one thing is the same in these two brave jurists that’s sadly lacking in too many others who take the responsibilities that come with their black robes more lightly. They respect the law, they demand respect for the judiciary and the rule of law in their courts, they recognize that foreclosures are tried in equity and principles of fairness are required. They’re great judges, destined to go down in the history books as American patriots stemming back a tide of corruption.

Leave a Reply