Comments on: Florida Example – Verification of Mortgage Foreclosure Complaint

By: angel

angel — Thu, 01 Mar 2012 00:13:30 +0000

I would love to see the other documents for Ms Mundy. I know that the law office that she did this paper work for has just fired a crap ton of notaries because of fraud. It’s made the papers, etc. and they are reviewing action against the lawyer too.

By: Ronal

Ronal — Tue, 21 Jun 2011 01:18:54 +0000

In reply to Michael. I have a signature on Miss Mundey, that I quite different than yours..

By: Anthony Fonseca

Anthony Fonseca — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 01:38:10 +0000

Why not attack the beast right to its heart. No bank lends its own money, or that of its investors’. It merely converts your signed note to a Cashier’s Check, which is guaranteed by the Fed. Reserve, which has no Federal Connection, except that it’s guarantees are backed by the US Treasury, which is backed by the taxing power of the Treasury, via the IRS etc, supported by the GDP of the USA, who then issues Fed.Reserve Notes as printed on the $bills (“Federal Reserve Note”). For using and converting your assets, you pay these honest banksters for 30 years every month. Of course when the bankster sells the note and mortgage to different entities (bifurcation), it keeps the money, often several times the value of the face value of the debt instruments. It then lends out 98% (as the actual rsserve reqor even 100% of that money on new mortgages

By: bpw

bpw — Mon, 20 Sep 2010 18:54:03 +0000

I have an affidavit in support of msj in which the plaintiff is National City Bank and Affiant is Mendy Mundey an authorized signator on behalf of Plaintiff. She signed as “authorized officer”….

By: DK

DK — Fri, 10 Sep 2010 21:08:42 +0000

I note this Verification was notarized. Is this required when the “Under penalty of perjury,,,” language is used. Opposing counsel on one of my cases argues that quoting the language in the Rule, and signing is sufficient to comply.
I think the Supreme Court gave a choice, to (1) swear to the facts (“oath”), (2) solemnly declare – if you don’t swear (“affirmation”), or (3) the language “under penalty of perjury”. The first two would be notarized to be effective. But did the SC intend that with the ‘under penalty of perjury’ language.
I am facing this argument in my cases where bank’s reps are using the statement and signing, without notarization. Any comments or direction to what the SC intended.

By: Robin

Robin — Thu, 02 Sep 2010 11:35:45 +0000

In reply to Doug Y.. How do I find out information about the person who signed my verification and if they are an authorized rep to modify with the FDLG? Any help in knowing what questions to ask would be appreciated.

By: Doug Y.

Doug Y. — Mon, 30 Aug 2010 02:23:01 +0000

GEEEEE… That wouldn’t be Florida Default Law Group now would it? I just got one of those where the signatory is the vice president of a bank in another state, and also is the authorized rep. to modify with a FDLG address and contact info… How curious!

By: Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny

Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty - Foe of Tyranny — Tue, 20 Apr 2010 01:43:54 +0000

Mario, one cannot enforce a copy.

There is a connection to PNC Bank made, but this is done in the notorial jurat, and not in the averment of the affiant. That seems extremely questionable to me. Also the form of the affidavit seems to be lacking. This isn’t any form of affidavit I’ve used. I am more familiar with the following:

“I, John Smith, am a resident Bad Sex, Illinois, am over the age of 21, and am competent to make the following averments:”

I note that Mendy has “read the forgoing,” yet fails to identify what the “forgoing” refers to. She may have had no idea whatsoever to what she was attesting, or what liabilities she opened herself to.

By: Michael

Michael — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 23:23:10 +0000

The Notary stated that this Mendy is “known” to them. How factual is that?

By: MARIO KENNY

MARIO KENNY — Sun, 18 Apr 2010 22:56:57 +0000

notice how it said that a photocopy is as good as an original, a debt note can also be treated in this way i would suppose