Henry Trawick’s Letter RE HB 87: The (un)Fair Foreclosure Act – “The best thing to do with the bill as presently drawn is to drop it”

Star Chamber Unfair

Henry Trawick’s Letter RE HB 87: The (un)Fair Foreclosure Act

For all of you who do not know who Mr Trawick is, he is the Godfather of Civil Procedure in Florida.

Be sure to read and share his letter below…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Henry Trawick’s Letter RE HB 87

Comments
5 Responses to “Henry Trawick’s Letter RE HB 87: The (un)Fair Foreclosure Act – “The best thing to do with the bill as presently drawn is to drop it””
  1. Kim Wilson says:

    What does Henry have to say about statute 673.3091 that removes the need for “standing” by ignoring our constitutional rights? Yes, you can enforce the note if it is gone or in possession of “a person that cannot be found or is not amenable to service of process”. STANDING ELIMINATED! The word “holding” has not only had its meaning altered in court but made irrelevant right here. Without “holding” the “original” contract then there is no proof of current ownership of the debt obligation that is transferable. (d) Because standing and holding have been eliminated the real owner might show up some day. This statute even has a plan for this situation by requiring the Plaintiff bank to require “adequate protection” against another “loss that might occur” by claim by another person to enforce the instrument. Yes, you might be required to get a Bond as insurance because there is no proof you are owed anything and banks are replacing standing with insurance in Florida. Maybe Henry can tell me what I have wrong here? Does Henry think the Closing agent should scan the original documents from closing and put them on line and file all original notes and mortgages at a government facility where you can request a certified copy. You know, like fix the problem instead of adjust the law to enable the criminals. What does Henry think would fix the problem? What about a formula like child support when the documents are missing and the homeowner cannot make the payment. Both parties failed their obligations eg. cash for keys, interest and or principle reduction based on market value and income. Henry please give us the solution. :-)

  2. yvonne says:

    Am getting the impression that these people in office and authority think they will be in their positions eternally…and that these same laws won’t affect them eventually….or their offsprings for generations to come…

  3. guest says:

    Geesh – I’d fight to get this gentleman before a hearing on the matter and quick – get it into the record somehow – file an emergency motion using his research and opinions – Matt, Tom, Neil, anybody down there – isn’t there an emergency pleading or something you can file to block using Trawick’s professional legal opinions??? Sort of like what they did in PA re the voter’s issues? At least get this opinion circulated and demand it be circulated to every party making a decision on this bill. . .

  4. marybsims@gmail.com says:

    I am not an attorney – but thanks for the courage to even out the field; not tilt it in favor of anyone. Just apply the same rules. Pushing foreclosures through makes it easier for so-so attorneys to justify their so-so arguments and make bad arguments that follow toxic titles and ownership.

    The lawyers and judges took an oath, right? Maybe time to re-read it instead of clearing the docket….

  5. Gee…..Mr. Tarwick’s letter on HB87 makes more sense than all the brain’s combined on plaintiff’s side of this horrible mess…..I am a beliver…never trust..verify first…especially on anything concerning a legal matter….I am not an attorney but when I read this Bill HB87…it was obvious this was being rushed thru to hammer the homeowners in foreclosure..leaving them with no rights….no say in the whole matter….and if Ms. Passidomo thinks for one minute that fast court proceedings slamming homeowners fighting foreclosures will improve the economy…she is dead wrong…maybe she should get out of the back pockets of the bankers and face reality….Just who’s economy is she trying to improve…her’s and the bankers? It certainly was not for the average Joe citizen homeowner fighting the banks who had no skin/ no money funded or invested with proof…giving the banks a free home is not the game we are playing…get that Ms. Passidomo..?

Leave a Reply