Washington County, Pennsylvania Brings Class Action to Recover Recording Fees Lost to Wall Street
Mason LLP, Robert Pierce & Associates, PC., and Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca. The County of Washington, Pennsylvania has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties, seeking to recover unpaid fees from U.S. Bank National Association. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Court of Commons Pleas, Washington County, No. 2011-7095.
Washington County, Pennsylvania (PRWEB) October 30, 2011
Mason LLP, Robert Pierce & Associates, PC., and Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca. The County of Washington, Pennsylvania has filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of Pennsylvania’s 67 counties, seeking to recover unpaid fees from U.S. Bank National Association. Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Court of Commons Pleas, Washington County, No. 2011-7095.
The Complaint alleges that U.S. Bank created mortgage-backed securities trusts, and earned millions of dollars, by telling the public that it held mortgages secured by real property in Pennsylvania as allowed by Pennsylvania law. However, the Complaint alleges that the mortgages were recorded in the name of the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (“MERS”) and assignments to U.S. Bank had not been recorded. Washington County’s Complaint demands that U.S. Bank either pay for the privilege of representing to investors that the loans in its trust had priority over subsequent liens or lose that right.
According to Gary E. Mason, an attorney representing Washington County, Pennsylvania counties are owed more than $100 million in recording fees that were not paid by U.S. Bank National Association and other financial institutions that relied on their membership in MERS to avoid paying these fees.
Washington County is represented by Gary E. Mason, Mason LLP, Jonathon W. Cuneo, Cuneo Gilbert & LaDuca, and Aaron Rihn, Robert Pierce & Associates, P.C.
Copy of the complaint below…
~
4closureFraud.org
~
County of Washington Pennsylvania vs U.S. Bank N.A.
The lawsuit in Washington County has failed to name as a party plaintiff the Recorder of Deeds who is responsible for collecting the recording fees.
The lack of subject matter jurisdiction may properly be raised for the first time at the appellate stage.
__Rodriquez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
__Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.140(b)
In Sarasota, former Chief Justice Lee Hayworth has stated in court at a foreclosure trial that the issue of documentary stamps not being paid has to be raised as an affirmative defense or it doesn’t count–there you have it!.
The same strategy can be used in Florida. Documentary Stamp Taxes must be paid for each assignment of mortgage pursuant to Florida Statute 201.08 and Somma v. Metra Electronics Corp. (Fla. 5th DCA 1999). The court lack jurisdiction when the taxes have not been paid. Even in appeal this defense can be raised for the first time. Practically all mortgages in foreclosure can use this defense. It is also another way to bring in stolen money to state coffer.
BRAVO!!! This is what we need more of…targeted lawsuits just like this one…these dirty crooks need to be held accountable..We The People need to take peaceful actions against them….NATIONWIDE…