<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Foreclosure Fraud &#8211; What You Don’t Know Can Hurt You	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%E2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/</link>
	<description>- Fighting Foreclosure Fraud BY SHARING THE KNOWLEDGE</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2013 02:00:15 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: jaco		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/#comment-414366</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[jaco]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Jun 2013 02:00:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=273#comment-414366</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[15 U.S.C. 1641(f)(2) says that the Servicers are under federal obligation to disclose the true owner of the obligation.  Help me locate this]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>15 U.S.C. 1641(f)(2) says that the Servicers are under federal obligation to disclose the true owner of the obligation.  Help me locate this</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: BANKSTERBUSTER		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/#comment-15492</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[BANKSTERBUSTER]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Dec 2010 19:12:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=273#comment-15492</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Excellent article,

    However,I do make one correction.  You say that the notes are owned by the securitization trusts.  That is how it should be.  The notes should be in the securitization trusts to back the mortgage backed securities.  But the securitizers didn&#039;t do that.  They just held the notes in a black box.  That&#039;s right, MBS are backed by nothing but fraud.  That is what your retirement fund invested in.  And now its too late to put the notes into the securitiation trusts because the pooling and servicing agreements requires that the note are place in the trust within 90 days of the trust&#039;s closing, and it requires that only performing notes may be placed into the trust.  Wall Street defrauded the investors out of trillions.  They sold the note and kept it too.  And now they arre feeling a little uncomfortable.

     The securitizers want to foreclosure the property to hand it over to Feddie May FedFraudMac to get 100 cents on the dollar for the note.  They need 100 cents on the dollar because the defrauded investors have to get 100 cents on the dollar or else they would have a cause of action for fraud.  To file a fraud cause of action, you must prove damages.  For instance, if I misrepresented a house to you, you bought it based upon my misrepresentation, and made $100,000 profit, then you have no cause of action for fraud.  You lack the element of damages.  Likewise, the investors in MBS have received every payment, and 100 cents on the dollar is backed by the taxpayer, so they can&#039;t sue for fraud.  

     Of course they could still sue for fraud in the inducement, which has a remedy of rescission.  Rescission mean you get your money back, but the fed is printing QE like a big dog to liquify the bank so the MBS investors can get their money back, the investor who want it.

    What goes on in mortgage fraud in driven by two goals.  The first goal is to foreclose the property so that the securitizer can pass the note to Fannie and Freddy for 100 cents on the dollar.  The second goal is to avoid disclosing documents that makes it apparent that the investors have been defrauded out of trillions.  So what they do is that they have MERS fabbricate an assignment to assign the note to the securitizer so that the securitizer can foreclose. The problem with this approach is that  MERS never owned the note, so they can&#039;t assign what they don&#039;t own.  MERS creates a conterfeit chain of title to hide the actual chain of title.  securitizers record that fraudulent assignment.  Securitizers use that fraudulent assignment in bankruptcy court to seek relief from the automatic stay.

    Courts are okay with it.  Sometime they say, &quot;Hey, you lack standing.&quot;  But they never say, &quot;Hey, that&#039;s fraud.&quot;  So an insolvent person whose house is being foreclosed is faced with coming up with alot of money for discovery to defend themselves.  They can&#039;t do it.  And if an attorney takes up the cause and proves the banks don&#039;t have standing, the courts never make the banks pay the home owner&#039;s attorney fees.  An attorney would starve fighting banking fraud, while the fraudulent bankster attorney&#039;s are paid well by the banks.  So if your waiting for the courts to save the situation, then you are out of luck.  This amount of corruption is a political question, it is not a legal question.  A legal system is designed to handle fraud on the edges, not fraud in nearly every transaction.  And judges, trying to manage their impossible caseloads, cave in to rubber stamping the banks fraudulent requests.  What I&#039;m telling you is that unless the pitchforks and torches come out, we&#039;re screwed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent article,</p>
<p>    However,I do make one correction.  You say that the notes are owned by the securitization trusts.  That is how it should be.  The notes should be in the securitization trusts to back the mortgage backed securities.  But the securitizers didn&#8217;t do that.  They just held the notes in a black box.  That&#8217;s right, MBS are backed by nothing but fraud.  That is what your retirement fund invested in.  And now its too late to put the notes into the securitiation trusts because the pooling and servicing agreements requires that the note are place in the trust within 90 days of the trust&#8217;s closing, and it requires that only performing notes may be placed into the trust.  Wall Street defrauded the investors out of trillions.  They sold the note and kept it too.  And now they arre feeling a little uncomfortable.</p>
<p>     The securitizers want to foreclosure the property to hand it over to Feddie May FedFraudMac to get 100 cents on the dollar for the note.  They need 100 cents on the dollar because the defrauded investors have to get 100 cents on the dollar or else they would have a cause of action for fraud.  To file a fraud cause of action, you must prove damages.  For instance, if I misrepresented a house to you, you bought it based upon my misrepresentation, and made $100,000 profit, then you have no cause of action for fraud.  You lack the element of damages.  Likewise, the investors in MBS have received every payment, and 100 cents on the dollar is backed by the taxpayer, so they can&#8217;t sue for fraud.  </p>
<p>     Of course they could still sue for fraud in the inducement, which has a remedy of rescission.  Rescission mean you get your money back, but the fed is printing QE like a big dog to liquify the bank so the MBS investors can get their money back, the investor who want it.</p>
<p>    What goes on in mortgage fraud in driven by two goals.  The first goal is to foreclose the property so that the securitizer can pass the note to Fannie and Freddy for 100 cents on the dollar.  The second goal is to avoid disclosing documents that makes it apparent that the investors have been defrauded out of trillions.  So what they do is that they have MERS fabbricate an assignment to assign the note to the securitizer so that the securitizer can foreclose. The problem with this approach is that  MERS never owned the note, so they can&#8217;t assign what they don&#8217;t own.  MERS creates a conterfeit chain of title to hide the actual chain of title.  securitizers record that fraudulent assignment.  Securitizers use that fraudulent assignment in bankruptcy court to seek relief from the automatic stay.</p>
<p>    Courts are okay with it.  Sometime they say, &#8220;Hey, you lack standing.&#8221;  But they never say, &#8220;Hey, that&#8217;s fraud.&#8221;  So an insolvent person whose house is being foreclosed is faced with coming up with alot of money for discovery to defend themselves.  They can&#8217;t do it.  And if an attorney takes up the cause and proves the banks don&#8217;t have standing, the courts never make the banks pay the home owner&#8217;s attorney fees.  An attorney would starve fighting banking fraud, while the fraudulent bankster attorney&#8217;s are paid well by the banks.  So if your waiting for the courts to save the situation, then you are out of luck.  This amount of corruption is a political question, it is not a legal question.  A legal system is designed to handle fraud on the edges, not fraud in nearly every transaction.  And judges, trying to manage their impossible caseloads, cave in to rubber stamping the banks fraudulent requests.  What I&#8217;m telling you is that unless the pitchforks and torches come out, we&#8217;re screwed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: DinFLA		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/#comment-332</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[DinFLA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 30 Jan 2010 04:45:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=273#comment-332</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[What an excellent read! Thank you.

You know what they do when they suspect a drug dealer selling from their home...they raid it...You know what they do when they know under age club kids go drinking...they raid the clubs. 

Why not raid these so called &quot;Fire Proof Vaults&quot; when there is case after case suspecting fraud?? 

I would also ask to see if they followed the requirements for SEC Rule 17F-1 with proof of the X17-F1A form that is required when there is a missing, lost, stolen securities.

It&#039;s all a cover up! Thanks to PAULSON, GEITHNER...etc. 

Now since Florida and the entire US is discovering the fraud they are trying to get Florida to become a Non Judicial foreclosure inititive! Don&#039;t Let This Happen!
]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What an excellent read! Thank you.</p>
<p>You know what they do when they suspect a drug dealer selling from their home&#8230;they raid it&#8230;You know what they do when they know under age club kids go drinking&#8230;they raid the clubs. </p>
<p>Why not raid these so called &#8220;Fire Proof Vaults&#8221; when there is case after case suspecting fraud?? </p>
<p>I would also ask to see if they followed the requirements for SEC Rule 17F-1 with proof of the X17-F1A form that is required when there is a missing, lost, stolen securities.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s all a cover up! Thanks to PAULSON, GEITHNER&#8230;etc. </p>
<p>Now since Florida and the entire US is discovering the fraud they are trying to get Florida to become a Non Judicial foreclosure inititive! Don&#8217;t Let This Happen!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Brett		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/#comment-29</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Brett]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 14:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=273#comment-29</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[While I wholly agree with you comparing a Note Endorsement with a &quot;Check&quot;, how does your argument stand when a Note (or so called &quot;certified true copy&quot; of the original) has an Endorsement in Blank?  And when that endorsement is on the front of the signature page as opposed to the reverse side of that page.  

My belief is that the Plantiffs are simply &quot;stamping&quot; the blank endorsement on a copy of the original Note and then copying that - now that would be as good a Fraud as you can get!  

Clearly such belief would warrent a physical inspection of the Orginal Note, and if the copy does not match the original - someone needs to go to jail!

You comments are appreciated.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I wholly agree with you comparing a Note Endorsement with a &#8220;Check&#8221;, how does your argument stand when a Note (or so called &#8220;certified true copy&#8221; of the original) has an Endorsement in Blank?  And when that endorsement is on the front of the signature page as opposed to the reverse side of that page.  </p>
<p>My belief is that the Plantiffs are simply &#8220;stamping&#8221; the blank endorsement on a copy of the original Note and then copying that &#8211; now that would be as good a Fraud as you can get!  </p>
<p>Clearly such belief would warrent a physical inspection of the Orginal Note, and if the copy does not match the original &#8211; someone needs to go to jail!</p>
<p>You comments are appreciated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: james		</title>
		<link>https://4closurefraud.org/2009/11/16/foreclosure-fraud-what-you-don%e2%80%99t-know-can-hurt-you/#comment-21</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[james]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Nov 2009 00:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://4closurefraud.org/?p=273#comment-21</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[oregon pers is investing in foreclosures judges are part of this pension http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WeB2klekfo]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oregon pers is investing in foreclosures judges are part of this pension <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WeB2klekfo" rel="nofollow ugc">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0WeB2klekfo</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
