Comments on: Florida Court System Facing $72.3 Million Deficit Due to Shortfall in Foreclosure Filing Fees

By: Maria Cheshire

Maria Cheshire — Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:00:53 +0000

HELLO EVERYONE! I STII IN FORECLOSURE FOR 5TH YEAR!!!!

By: RAMONA

RAMONA — Thu, 24 Mar 2011 04:30:11 +0000

In reply to Bobbi Swann. sweet revenge will be storming thebastille!!

By: Tim Bryant

Tim Bryant — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:21:37 +0000

In reply to Tim Bryant.

No, you’re spot on, except for assuming that these documents were considered fraud. They were, until recently accepted with open arms by the courts as being genuine.

Here is the legal paradox…If it is fraud, than the judges kicked a lot of folks out of their homes via fraud. If they admit that it is fraud, those same homeowners can stake a title claim on those same house (which may have since been resold), then you have an ad infinitum scenario.

I personally think that they should let that happen, to right the ship. But common sense is not a strong suit of the legislators or judiciary.

By: Tim Bryant

Tim Bryant — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:20:43 +0000

In reply to Master David Goodmen.

Master David,

To catch you up to speed, you can review the advertisement for this well-known company, DocX. That is where a lot of them were getting their proof. Read this advertisement in MortgageMag REAL carefully….
http://www.mortgagemag.com/guide/c004/c004850.htm

By: Marilyn Abdilla

Marilyn Abdilla — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:14:56 +0000

In reply to Master David Goodmen.

Master David…Yes, you are right…there is a time limit to produce proof. But one must remember the fraudsters don’t follow the same set of rules we, the homeowners, must obey. And the courts followed what the banksters requested and demanded. Do you see the connection??
I know a case that had a hearing, the first hearing, in June 2010. The papers showed nothing but copies of the original mortage….. This case was a dud…the judge said to Mills lawyer to re-summit the papers with proof of ownership. therefore, they didn’t have to pay another filing fee. Two weeks later the homeowner filed a motion to produce…a list of over 20 documents as proof. two weeks later the Mill asked for ‘ time to respond ‘..that was August 10, 2010…since than…NOTHING…not a word. So this is proof that the banks do as they please.

By: Master David Goodmen

Master David Goodmen — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 20:07:48 +0000

In reply to Tim Bryant. Greetings Tim, I am not sure what I am seeing. "Instant Public Records" sounds a bit suspicious to Me, as it does NOT say "Instant public records forms ready for filing". The rest does not seem, on the surface, to be bad. "contacts, addresses, fees and requirements for more than 3,400 recording jurisdictions" actually sounds useful. Google shows DOCX GETNET. One of their stated "services" is "Cure Defective Assignment", which sounds impossible, from what I have read, here. More searching, and there is "CF01___Recreate Entire Collateral File___$95.00 + TPC", where "TPC" means "Third Party Costs". (TPC includes postage, but not shipping. Howzat??) The time limit to produce proper documents should still apply. Phony documents should be charged, judicially and financially, as FRAUD. Am I missing something?

By: Marilyn Abdilla

Marilyn Abdilla — Wed, 23 Mar 2011 19:48:41 +0000

What I found on the States Courts Reserve Trust Funds is that it , the courts trust….is funded by the fee’s…nothing said of the fines. Now If one goes on google…there are various trust funds. It tells how the legislators ‘ borrow’ from the trusts, if needed, to balance the budget…to transfer funds to other trusts where needed….sounds like alot of ‘ fudging ‘ to me…I may be wrong. It just seems alot of flipping done back and forth.
In the funding problems in the judiciary…they claim the massive ‘ problems ‘ with Robo-signers and other irregularities in the foreclosures caused the slow down of foreclosures in the courts. WELL…if the foreclosures were already filed in the court system…..and a filing fee was paid…..that is where they should have stayed. Not removed to hide the fraud…that some seem to think as ‘ problems ‘…. Those with a court case assigned to it should have gone thru the system…than a stiff fine for every fraud would have added the funds they now seek. They sided with the banksters and fraud Mills…let them cry in their shot of scotch….close the doors of Justice…cause there was no justice for the homeowners. Must we play our violins now????? Better yet..our bagpipes?????

By: Tim Bryant

Tim Bryant — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 16:56:41 +0000

This is ominous in itself, but gets better. The fees they rely on are kept in a ”trust fund”. The article does not state who holds and manages the Trust Fund. I was just sort of wondering if this was used as an investment vehicle. Do the mortgages they are making judicial decisions on, help fund the Trust? This would be both ironic and scary. It would also call into question whether there is true impartiality in the court system. Florida judges have been especially highlighted as abusing homeowners in foreclosure proceedings.

We may want to find out more about this “Trust Fund”. This may explain why FL judges have been abused their discretion in many cases. If anybody can get specific info on this, please post. This may be more important than we may think. How many other states use the same funding mechanism for the courts?

By: Bobbi Swann

Bobbi Swann — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:57:28 +0000

As a Floridian and in a foreclosure myself I wholeheatedly agree with every single post here. I say Nay to more money to the courts and start the layoffs now! Get rid of those judges they brought in out of retirement, paid huge fees to sit on the bench doing robo foreclosures. Ha! It’s not fun to lose a job and face the consequences of a lender in foreclosure. Who knows, we may see some of those names appearing on Lis Pendens who worked to put people out of their own homes! I say Karma is sweet revenge!

By: Master David Goodmen

Master David Goodmen — Tue, 22 Mar 2011 14:26:13 +0000

As I understand it, the banksters have sixty days to produce proof of their statements. The banksters have the required proof, or they do not! Why are there cases older than sixty days, then?

Absent proof, the homeowner wins, in My view.

Just leaving something hanging around in the court system will not make it eventually become legal. It is legal, or it is NOT legal, period. In either case, finish it, and move on!

Where are the perjury fees, from the robo-signed documents? Aren’t those 10k$ EACH??