Flyin Fraud

Robo-Testifiers: Proof of Bank Attorney Involvement

Trial orders generally require the parties to disclose their witnesses before trial. It is typical that, even though servicers rarely use more than one witness at trial, they list several, even dozens, (62 in the example below) all to testify about the same thing because they do not know which of the army of robo-testifiers will be assigned to the case. The very fungibility of these witnesses indicates that they have no personal knowledge of the facts of any particular borrower’s loan.

Note that the Florida evidence code permits parties to introduce documents into evidence at trial through “a certification or declaration” of the records custodian or other qualified witness that says that the records meet the “business records” hearsay exception. § 90.902, Fla. Stat. So there is no need to undergo the expense of training and transporting live witnesses, when they could just submit what is essentially an affidavit as to each set of records. This can only mean that the real records custodians/qualified witnesses will not testify as needed, not just because the banks attorneys are choosing the more expensive route, but because submitted such affidavits would expose the signers to deposition—just as the original robo-signers were.

~

4closureFraud.org

~

Example of Bank Witness List with 62 Names