How to Set Them & How to Avoid Them
Discover HOW TO STOP Mortgage and Foreclosure Fraud and Save Your Piece of The American Dream Using the Rule of Law and the American Judicial System
Copyright © 2019 All Rights Reserved
READ THIS FIRST
Knowledge is power.
But knowledge without action is powerless!
You have legal rights that you can use to gain the remedy that you deserve. However, these legal rights cannot work for you unless you have knowledge of them, and you know how to use them.
“My people are destroyed for a lack of knowledge…” Hosea 4:6
I have researched the foreclosure epidemic and have discovered that banks and mortgage lenders are relentlessly violating state and federal laws (and homeowner’s legal rights) in order to illegally foreclose on properties, they have no legal right to!
Fortunately, there are legal remedies for homeowners struggling with foreclosure. Most mortgage loans contain legally problematic issues that can render the mortgage loan contract void.
I’m just an average Joe and was reluctant to write this report; but after I discovered the truth behind the foreclosure epidemic, I knew something had to be done.
This report exposes some of the inside secrets that the big banks and Wall Street Insiders do not want you to discover and can give you the power you need to fight back against mortgage and foreclosure fraud.
Hopefully you will find the information useful. If you do please play it forward and share it with others, so together we can all get the legal remedy we deserve.
TABLE OF CONTENT
Read This First ………3
Table of Content …………4
Introduction and Short Stories ……5
Traps, Pitfalls, and Swindles…………..9
A Primer on Mortgages ………………………..17
A Brief History of Time ……………………………………20
Table Funded Loans……………………………………………..22
How Banks Win……………………………………………..30
The Cheshire Cat & Dr. Who ……………………..38
Setting Traps …………………………………..40
How to Win in Court ………………….46
Lawyers, Liars, & Losers…………56
How FRAUD STOPPERS Can Help …59
Make Money Helping Others ……………..63
Winning Lawsuits & Free Houses …………….65
INTRODUCTION & SHORT STORIES
America is currently experiencing an economic and foreclosure crisis. Unfortunately, Millions of innocent hard-working people have lost their homes to foreclosure, and millions more are in danger of the same fate.
No Government Help! Government bailouts and forbearance programs have done NEXT TO NOTHING to help homeowners that are struggling with foreclosure. Mega-banks and mortgage lenders have been caught red-handed breaking state and federal laws, committing mortgage fraud, foreclosure fraud, securities fraud, bank and insurance fraud, tax evasion, swindling trillions in bailout money, and using every dirty trick in the book to profit from fraudulent illegal mortgages. Unfortunately, our Government has done little to stop the banks. So, if anything is going to be done it must be done by us
Across the country, banks are committing outrageous crimes, including illegally foreclosing on homes. Banks have even been caught stealing people’s belongings and changing the locks on the doors before a foreclosure is even filed!
Elderly homeowners are tricked into foreclosure. Consumer Digest reported in March 2011 about two elderly homeowners in Wood River, IL who were hoodwinked by their mortgage servicer into foreclosure. Reportedly after spending $350 for an unexpected furnace repair, they realized they didn’t have enough money to make their monthly mortgage payment; which they had been paying (on time) for nearly 25 years.
So, they did what any responsible person would do, and they called their mortgage servicer, PNC Mortgage, to give them a “heads up” and ask for a little leniency.
According to the homeowner’s attorney, PNC Mortgage would modify the terms of their loan on one condition: that they stopped making their monthly payments.
Trusting their mortgage company, they did what they were told to do and applied for a loan modification. Only to be rewarded with PNC filing a foreclosure on them. That’s right, with over 25 years of equity in their home, their greedy mortgage company couldn’t wait to foreclose on them and sell the property for top dollar.
Bank of America tries to foreclose on a home paid for in cash, with NO mortgage on it: A local news agency in Florida reported on this case where Bank of American tried to foreclose on a property that never even had a mortgage on it.
The property was purchased in cash, but that did not stop Bank of America from trying to foreclose on the property. Fortunately, the homeowners hired a lawyer and were able to save their home from this illegal foreclosure attempt. With a court order in hand the homeowner’s attorney showed up to the local Bank of America branch accompanied by Sheriff Deputies and a moving company to foreclose on the bank.
After the BOA branch manager realized that the Sheriff Deputies were going to allow the moving company to remove everything out of the bank (including the cash in the drawers) he called Bank of America’s corporate offices and quickly had the issue resolved. It’s amazing what can happen when you overturn the tables on these Money-Changers!
Charlie and Maria also paid for their home in cash — and they also got foreclosed on: Charlie and Maria Cardoso paid for their future Florida retirement home with cash in 2005.
The couple, who still lives in Massachusetts, had their home foreclosed on by Bank of America five years later this past February… but the bank had the wrong house.
The tenant renting the house from the Cardoso’s called the couple last July when three men showed up to clean out the house and change the locks. Charlie Cardoso talked to the Bank of America real estate agent who said he would tell the bank that they had the wrong house. But a month later a landscaper hired by Bank of America showed up to mow the lawn, causing the tenant to get worried and move before Christmas.
It gets worse. In January the bank put a lock box on the front door. When Charlie Cardoso drove down to Florida to convince the bank they had the incorrect address on the foreclosure documents, he missed his son’s homecoming from Iraq.
The couple had kept photos, clothes, tools and other items at the home. Everything had been removed and was presumably lost, they say. The Cardoso’s have filed a suit against Bank of America for $500,000 and charging the company with defamation and libel.
Dan Smith got tricked by a teaser rate: Dan Smith is a 33-year-old electrician living in Oakview, California. He devised a carefully thought out budget and decided he could pay $2,700 monthly payment on a home. He bought a home for his family and signed all the documents thinking everything was fine. Then the third month he received a mortgage bill for $3,600.
They thought it was a mistake and they called up their broker, who said ‘Didn’t I tell you that was a teaser rate?’ Smith said if he had known the mortgage payment was going to be that much, he never would have bought the house. He lost his home and was left with “huge debt and a horrible credit score.”
Anna Ramirez was foreclosed on by mistake: Florida resident Anna Ramirez came home last year to find her belongings strewn across her yard, after JPMorgan Chase held an auction on her home. Initially, the WSJ reported that the incident was due to a mistake in the clerk’s office and a Chase spokesman was investigating the situation.
But the Journal later updated the story saying Ramirez had not paid her mortgage in some time, but court clerical errors led to her eviction. This complicated story proves just how inept our banks’ reporting keeping processes are.
Active duty Navy Officer was illegally foreclosed on and evicted on Memorial Day: Mr. Worrell, an active duty Naval Officer from Florida, was illegally foreclosed on by Emigrant Bank while he was deployed overseas, and while he was in an active bankruptcy.
Emigrant Bank violated two federal laws when they illegally foreclosed on Mr. Worrell. Then they evicted Mr. Worrell from his home on Memorial Day, while he was in his Navy Uniform.
Serendipitously the local Channel 12 News team was on his block filming the Memorial Day parade and caught the illegal eviction on camera. The reporter told Mr. Worrell Channel 12 News would air his story all weekend long. Unfortunately, after airing the story only once, Channel 12 News received a call from the bank and quickly canned the story.
To understand how and why stories like these can be happening all over America, you first must understand the difference between common law mortgage loan contracts and table funded securitized mortgage loan contracts. But before we discuss that, there are some common pitfalls and traps to be aware of.
TRAPS, PITFALLS, AND SWINDLES
If you are facing foreclosure choosing the wrong plan of action can be disastrous. Depending on what path you decide to take, there are often some common dangers to avoid.
One question people in foreclosure have is whether to try and sell the property. Prior to the 2008 economic meltdown selling was usually relatively easy for most homeowners because the housing economy was stable, and they had equity.
However, due to the downturn in the housing market many parts of the country’s real estate markets have fallen below 50% of the value, they were just a few short years ago, more and more homeowners are discovering that selling their house is next to impossible. For homeowners in this situation, selling their house often requires asking their mortgage lender to agree to a short sale. A short sale occurs when a mortgage lender agrees to accept less than the total amount owed, as payment in full.
The danger with a short sale is your lender can come after you for the outstanding balance using a deficiency judgment. So even though your mortgage lender agrees to let you sell the property for less than the full amount owned on the loan, you could still be on the hook for any deficiencies. For example, if you owe $100,000 on your mortgage and you sold it for the short sale amount of $50,000, the bank may issue you an IRS form 1099 for the $50,000 they have lost. So, if you’re considering a short sale, make sure your lender agrees, in writing, not to seek a deficiency judgment.
If your lender isn’t willing to agree to NOT seek a deficiency judgment, then you could consider a deed-in-lieu instead. A deed-in-lieu is when your mortgage lender allows you to sign the property over to them, and you simply walk away. In return, they agree to stop the foreclosure and not seek a deficiency judgment. This option may be preferable to a short sale, because with a deed-in-lieu you can avoid any future collection efforts or 1099 forms.
If you are thinking about trying a Short Sale or Deed-in-Lieu its best to get the help of a Realtor who has a Short Sales and Foreclosure Resource (SFR) certification. The SFR certification means that the agent has received formal training concerning issues related to foreclosures and short sales and can help you avoid some common mistakes that unrepresented buyers/sellers make.
The thing that both a Short Sale and a Deed-in-Lieu have in common is that the homeowner does NOT receive any money from the transaction! If you sell the house for less than the amount owed there is no money paid to you at the closing because the sale amount falls short. And in a Deed-in-Lieu you simply sign the property over to the bank and walk away, empty-handed.
However, if you are considering a short sale or deed-in-lieu there might be a way for you to enjoy the benefits of both a short sale and deed-in-lieu, and profit at the same time by working with a local investor who is willing to short sale the property and then sell it back to you at a reduced rate using owner financing or a lease with option to purchase agreement. If you find an honest, ethical, private investor you might be able to create a win-win situation where you can walk away from your foreclosure with profits in your pockets.
FRAUD STOPPERS PMA has acquired a list of ethical investors who can help you create a win-win scenario. For more information visit: https://www.fraudstoppers.org/real-estate-investor-joint-venture-and-private-equity-refinance-programs/
The foreclosure prevention specialist: The “specialist” really is a phony counselor who charges high fees in exchange for making a few phone calls or completing some paperwork that homeowners could easily do for themselves. These actions rarely result in saving the house. This scam gives homeowners a false sense of hope, delays them from seeking qualified help, and exposes their personal financial information to a fraud. Some of these companies even use names with the word HOPE or HOPE NOW in them to confuse borrowers who are looking for assistance from the free 888-995-HOPE hotline.
The Mortgage Assistance Relief Services (MARS) Rule makes it illegal for someone to charge upfront fees for loan modification and other foreclosure prevention services, requires specific disclosures in ads, and outlines other restrictions that are designed to protect you from people or companies that would like to take advantage of you. Although there are some organizations and individuals that are exempt from this law. However, the rule of thumb is to steer away from any person or company operating in the public that is demanding large upfront fees for foreclosure prevention services that claim they are going to help you “save your home from foreclosure”.
The lease/buyback: Homeowners are deceived into signing over the deed to their home to a scam artist who tells them they will be able to remain in the house as a renter and eventually buy it back. Usually, the terms of this scheme are so demanding that the buyback becomes impossible, the homeowner gets evicted, and the “rescuer” walks off with most or all the equity. There are honest decent private investors out that… but as with everything buyer/seller beware. IF you are considering this type of transaction you should always have a licensed attorney review and approve the contract before signing.
The bait and switch: Homeowners think they are signing documents to bring the mortgage current. Instead, they are signing over the deed to their home. Homeowners usually don’t know they’ve been scammed until they get an eviction notice.
The phantom landlord scam: This scam is simple to spot and easy to defeat. A property is listed for rent, usually online. The so-called “landlord” tells you to send them the rental deposit, and they will send you the keys. Scam artist locate homes that are vacant (usually foreclosures), change the locks, clean them up, and list them for rent. Do NOT rent a house from anyone, unless you are sure the so-called “landlord” is the legitimate owner of the property.
Besides scam companies taking advantage of homeowners, the Banks business model is to take advantage of them too. Securitization is the reason banks want to foreclose on homeowners. When a bank assigns the risk of a loan to the investors (certificate holders) of a Real Estate Investment Conduit Trust (SPV), the “bank” is no longer a traditional bank that gets the benefit of mortgage payments; but they can make big profits when they foreclose on a property!
Mortgage banks give as few modifications as possible and comply minimally with statutes put in place to protect borrowers, all while employing tricks to “cash in” on homeowners’ defaults, pushing them to foreclosure. Banks benefit from foreclosures more than loan modifications because of something called “creaming the debt.” If the Banks modify the loan, their penalties and fees might not get paid to them. When they foreclose, they get their penalties first, before the investors– which is the “creaming.” The mortgage banks make more money from foreclosure than servicing the homeowner’s payment.
When foreclosure becomes a possibility, like when a borrower misses a payment or asks for a modification, the banks seize the opportunity for increased profit by foreclosure. Foreclosure is clearly the fattest pot of gold possible and it’s for this reason foreclosure is the bank’s primary goal. The banks take the risk of litigation because few people sue but getting legal information as soon as possible can make the difference between homeowners asserting their rights or losing their homes while being bulldozed by the bank. Here are some common tricks the banks and loan servicers use against unsuspecting homeowners:
Bank Trick #1: Refusing Payments: The bank refuses the check a homeowner sends in. The bank may offer a reason (for example, there’s a mistake on the account) or it might offer no explanation at all. The bank may even offer the homeowner a loan modification. The bank does this to delay the homeowner from immediately contacting an attorney to pursue a breach of contract claim.
Alternately, the bank may take trial payments to further delay the homeowner until the arrears (also known as the forbearance) becomes so great that the homeowner is ineligible for a loan modification or unable to repay the debt. Eventually, the servicer combines this trick with other tricks, such as changing servicers, to draw the homeowner further into default.
Bank Trick #2: Switching Services during Modification: A homeowner gets a loan modification with one servicer and makes trial payments. The servicer advises the homeowner that it is switching servicing rights to another servicer.
The new servicer claims to know nothing about the modification and delays the homeowner for months waiting to get the relevant “paperwork.” No matter how many times the homeowner sends proof of the modification, the new servicer refuses to honor it. It is a violation of California law to not honor a modification from a prior servicer, but servicers know that most people will not pursue litigation.
Bank Trick #3: Breaching a Modification Contract: The homeowner gets a loan modification that includes a balloon payment of, for example, $50,000 after 20 years. After paying on this loan modification for a year and a half, the homeowner gets a new modification in the mail from the same servicer with a balloon payment of $150,000. No matter how many times the borrower calls the servicer, or tries to forward the existing modification, the agent will respond with a fixed script that does not acknowledge the prior modification but only talks about the new one. The confused borrower will feel like he or she is talking to a robot (on a recorded line, being monitored by a supervisor). Eventually, if the borrower does not sign and execute the new modification, the bank will begin to refuse their payments on the old modification.
The servicer will also create a paper trail that tells a different story than what is happening. If the bank is trying to stick a borrower with a new modification, the paper trail will show the borrower is refusing the modification and mention nothing about the old one. Eventually, the servicer will stop accepting payments unless the homeowner acquiesces to the new modification.
Bank Trick #4: Extra Fees & Escrow Accounts: The homeowner receives a bill for extra fees out of nowhere so that the mortgage payment becomes something the homeowner suddenly can’t afford. The servicer refuses to accept any “partial payment.” After that, the bank continues adding on fees each month, increasing the amount the borrower must pay to reinstate. They may offer the homeowner a loan modification as a distraction to trick the homeowner into a longer default. Because the borrower thinks they are getting a modification, they will spend the money they would have put towards their mortgage and be unprepared to pay their arrears if the modification falls through, as it most likely will. The servicer does all this while telling the borrower they are there to help.
The servicer may pay homeowner taxes early and then accuse the homeowner of not paying them. The servicer may point to a clause in the mortgage that says if the homeowner doesn’t pay the taxes, they can raise the interest rate. They may begin charging the homeowner for forced place insurance at a high rate even though the homeowner already has insurance. This is something the homeowner only finds out after-the-fact when trying to pay property taxes.
Bank Trick #5: False Notices: In a non-judicial foreclosure state, such as California, foreclosure is done by recorded notice. The Notice of Default states the amount of arrears that a homeowner must pay back to reinstate the loan.
Servicers uniformly overstate this amount by up to $20,000, which serves two purposes: (1) It scares borrowers with an inflated amount of arrears that they believe they can’t cure; and (2) It creates a paper trail for the bank, so they can claim more money from investors.
Bank Trick #6: Multiple Modifications and Dual Tracking:
The bank must respond to the loan modification application with a denial or approval within a definite period. A denial must be in writing and must inform the borrower of the right to appeal. The bank cannot “dual track” a borrower by posting Notices of Foreclosure and Trustee’s Sale while reviewing the borrower for a modification.
There are big penalties for “dual tracking” by the bank, but only if it is the borrower’s first time applying. Therefore, a servicer will often deny a modification over the phone or encourage a borrower to apply again. Once a borrower becomes a serial modifier, the bank can dual track the borrower all it wants without statutory penalties. And, they will!
Bank Trick #7: Zombie Foreclosures:
Sometimes banks will foreclose on properties, and then never actually take possession of the property. This practice is often referred to as “Zombie Titles”. As a result, many former homeowners now find themselves stuck with thousands of dollars in unpaid bills for property maintenance. Sometimes under the threat of arrest!
Here are some additional things to remember:
- Avoid any firm that guarantees it can halt the foreclosure process. In the foreclosure prevention business, there are no guarantees. My advice to you is this: If anyone guarantees you anything, don’t walk away from them, run away! Now having said that I can guarantee you one thing: If you don’t fight, you cannot win!
- Steer clear of any firm that tells you not to contact your lender, lawyer, or credit or housing counselor. Firms that shell out that advice know those professionals will spot a scam right away and warn you.
- Avoid any foreclosure prevention company that wants to charge a large fee before helping, especially payments by cashier’s check, money-dot cards, or a wire transfer.
- Stay away from any firm that encourages you to sign the home over to them so you can lease your home or buy it back over time.
- Reject any firm that recommends that you make your mortgage payments directly to them, rather than your lender.
- Avoid a foreclosure firm that demands you transfer your property deed or title to them.
- Try to save money if you are not paying your mortgage, because you will need it later.
- Make sure you’re keeping informed about your foreclosure. Keep track of any court dates or auction dates. You do not want to find out your house was sold at the auction after it happens, and now you only have two weeks to move out. So, stay on top of the situation. For more information on what to do if you receive a notice of default, or foreclosure notice, watch this video https://www.fraudstoppers.org/default-notice/
- Make sure you get legal advice from a competent local attorney. Do NOT take legal advice from a non-attorney, or so called “foreclosure expert”. FRAUD STOPPERS recommend that you get access to a competent local attorney in your state to get all your legal questions answered and get legal advice. Even if your attorney is not a so-called “mortgage fraud expert” or “foreclosure fraud expert” it doesn’t matter, because advice from a licensed attorney is almost always better than advice from a non-attorney.
A PRIMER ON MORTGAGES
When a person takes out a loan to buy a home, they sign two separate and totally distant contracts.
One contract is the Promissory Note (aka: the loan agreement) and the other is the Security Instrument (aka: the mortgage-or-deed of trust).
The Note states that the lender is loaning you money and you agree to pay it back over a time, typically 30 years.
The Mortgage or Deed of Trust states that if you do not pay back the loan, the bank can foreclose on your home.
These two separate and totally distinct contracts come together to form one single contract, which is called the mortgage loan contract.
Under common law a basic concept is that “the mortgage follows the note”. This was pronounced by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1872 in Carpenter v. Longan, 83 US. 271, 274 as follow: “…the note and mortgage are inseparable…, the assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity”. A nullity is the state of having NO Legal Validity. In other words, it’s legally void!
Remember it is the Security Instrument (the Mortgage-or-Deed of Trust) that gives someone the legal authority to foreclose on a property. ASSIGNMENT OF A MORTGAGE WITHOUT TRANSFER OF THE DEBT IS A NULLITY. Lawyers for the foreclosure mills are often using MERS assignments as a substitute for transfer of the debt.
Under common law the Note and Mortgage are supposed to stay together as one contract. Otherwise if a bank was to sell or transfer the note to another entity, but they failed to properly transfer or assign the mortgage along with the note, the party that holds the note (without the mortgage) would have no legal authority to foreclose on the property, if the borrower defaulted on the note; because it’s the mortgage (security instrument, aka: the lien) that gives you the legal authority to foreclose on the property if the loan is not paid.
On August 28, 2009 the Supreme Court of the State of Kansas stated in LANDMARK NATIONAL BANK v. KESLER that “the splitting of the note and mortgage creates an immediate and fatal flaw in title”.
The fatal flaw results in no one having the legal authority to foreclose on a property, because the party that sold the note would have received consideration (money) when they sold it, and therefore they cannot foreclose on the property because they were paid off, because to do so would be Double Dipping, which is illegal.
Furthermore, the party that paid for (and received) the note, without having the security instrument (mortgage or deed of trust), could not legally foreclose either because it’s the security instrument that gives someone the right to foreclose if the borrower defaults on the note.
So, if the note and mortgage were separated no one would have the right to foreclose. Remember under common law the note and the mortgage must stay together.
Some lawyers representing foreclosing entities have argued that under common law “the mortgage follows the note” means that if they are in possession of the note, they are also in possession of the mortgage, because the two are inseparable. So, by default if they hold the note, they hold the mortgage and have legal rights to foreclose. However, without a contract in writing executed with the formalities required for transfer of interests in real property, it is highly probable that any instrument executed on behalf of MERS means nothing without the necessity of drilling into the authority or knowledge of the signor. In fact, it might just be that the execution of an assignment might be the utterance of a false instrument for purposes of recording, which in and of itself constitutes illegal activity. Neil Garfield
Now the bank’s lawyers claim that under UCC 3-205b because they are in possession of the note in bearer form, and the borrower defaulted on the note, they have the right to foreclose on the property; end of story!
But wait, what the banks do not want you to understand is that it is legally impossible to attach article 9 to the UCC receivables (securities) to enforce a lien on real property. You will discover why as you keep reading. For now, just keep in mind that in a common law mortgage loan contract the borrower creates the promissory note (it was the borrower’s instrument—they were the creators of it, and they owned it); then the borrower gives the promissory note to the lender who excepts it for value and loans the borrower money. After the borrowers pays back the loan, the lender should issue a Release of Mortgage, thereby releasing their claim over the collateral.
In a Normal Common Law Mortgage Loan Transaction:
- The borrower creates a note (promise to pay).
- The borrower gives the note to the lender.
- The lender accepts the note.
- The lender gives consideration (money) to the borrower.
- The borrower uses the money to buy the property.
- The borrower pledges the property as collateral on the loan agreement by granting the lender a mortgage.
- The borrower pays off the loan.
- When the loan is paid off the lender issues a Release of Mortgage releasing their interest over the collateral.
This is how mortgages worked for hundreds of years!
A BRIEF HISTORY OF TIME
In 1933, in the wake of the 1929 stock market crash and during a nationwide commercial bank failure and the Great Depression, Congress passed a law known as the Glass-Steagall Act in order to safeguard the Country from repeating another Great Depression!
This law separated investment and commercial banking activities. At the time, “improper banking activity,” or what was considered overzealous commercial bank involvement in stock market investment, was deemed the main culprit of the financial crash. According to that reasoning, commercial banks took on too much risk with depositors’ money.
The Glass–Steagall Act describes the four provisions of the U.S. Banking Act of 1933 that limited securities, activities, and affiliations within commercial banks and securities firms. This law acted as a firewall that protected the American People against “improper banking activities” for 70 years and made what the banks are doing today a felony!
The Glass–Steagall separation of commercial and investment banking prevented commercial Federal Reserve member banks from:
- Dealing in non-governmental securities for customers
- Investing in non-investment grade securities for themselves
- Underwriting or distributing non-governmental securities
- Affiliating (or sharing employees) with companies involved in such activities
Conversely, Glass–Steagall prevented securities firms and investment banks from taking deposits.
The law gave banks one year after the law was passed on June 16, 1933 to decide whether they would be a commercial bank or an investment bank. They could be one or the other, but not both.
There were several “loopholes” that regulators and financial firms were able to exploit during the lifetime of Glass–Steagall restrictions. Neither savings and loans nor state-chartered banks that did not belong to the Federal Reserve System were restricted by Glass–Steagall. Glass–Steagall also did not prevent securities firms from owning such institutions.
So, starting in the 1960’s banks began chipping away at the Glass–Steagall Act. Unfortunately, it would only be a matter of time before the Wall Street bankers would find a way to overcome the Glass–Steagall Act.
Then in 1999 it finally happened; and the last thing that Congress did before they went on Christmas break in 1999 was repeal the Glass–Steagall Act. This gave the banks the number one thing on their Christmas wish list.
Now with Glass-Steagall out of the way the banks would be able to convert our mortgages into Mortgage Backed Securities (MBS) that could be sold and traded on Wall Street. Coincidentally once the Glass–Steagall Act was repealed it only took eight short years for the banks to nearly crash the entire economy again. Except this time the banks engineered an sinister plan to profit from the economic ruin they were going to create!
TABLE FUNDED LOAN
When Congress repealed the Glass-Steagall Act they passed the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999.
During debate in the House of Representatives, Rep. John Dingell (Democrat of Michigan) argued that the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act would result in banks becoming “too big to fail.” Dingell further argued that this would necessarily result in a bailout by the Federal Government and the American tax payers. Unfortunately, he would be proven right!
Now the banks could exploit new mortgage transactions called Table Funded Securitized Loans, wherein a mortgage loan contract could be digitized into a Mortgage Backed Security (MBS) to be sold and traded on Wall Street.
A mortgage-backed security (MBS) is a type of asset-backed security that is secured by a mortgage or collection of mortgages. The mortgages are sold to a group of individuals (a government agency or investment bank) that securitizes, or packages, the loans together into a security that investors can buy.
However, to do this, the banks would have to induce borrowers into signing mortgage loan documents using fraud and deception. You see if you purchased a property in last 10 to 15 years then you probably thought that you were signing a normal common law mortgage loan contract, where your “lender” was loaning you money to buy your home. However, if your mortgage loan contract was one of the approximately 70,000,000 mortgages digitized into an electronic file in the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) then you probably have a securitized loan!
The next few pages will describe some of the technical problems with securitized mortgage loan contracts. If you have a hard time understanding this material, don’t worry, many attorneys are not 100% familiar with this subject matter. Just keep in mind that if your mortgage loan was part of a securitized table funded transaction there is probably legal violations, breaches of contract, and fraud that could give you legal standing to sue for financial compensation and possible quiet title (clear and free) title to your home.
Securitization occurs when the Mortgage Loan Originator offers as consideration the mortgage loan instrument to an Account Debtor (Sponsor/Seller) who swaps the intangible payment stream for certificates that are sold to investors who are paid the income from the certificates.
When the Tangible Obligation (Promissory Note) and the Security Instrument (Mortgage, Deed of Trust or Security Deed) is sold in the secondary market to an Intangible Account Obligee (REMIC Trust) an Intangible Obligation is created under UCC Article 8. The existence of the Intangible Obligation under UCC Article 8 depends on the Tangible Instrument secured by a properly and continuously perfected security interest requiring the tangible Security Instrument be filed with the County Recorder’s Office.
Digitizing the tangible Promissory Note and the tangible Security Instrument into electronic data creates an electronic file called a Mortgage Loan Package. This electronic file is presented to various parties for evaluation and rating and appears legal. The Electronic Mortgage Loan Package is commonly, but incorrectly identified as the “Mortgage Loan Package” and is nothing more than an interest in the payment stream from the Intangible Payment Obligation originating from the Tangible Promissory Note obligation.
The electronic digitized version of the Security Instrument is often filed with the County Recorder’s Office and gives the illusion of legitimacy by allegedly providing a security interest for an alternate method of collecting value for the UCC Article 8 Intangible Obligation. In reality, the maker of the Intangible Obligation pledged the digitized version of a UCC Article 3 Security Instrument which is not perfected as it is recorded without the purchaser’s identity.
The Account Debtor claims to execute a True Sale of the Tangible Obligation and the Security Interest to the purchaser of the Intangible Obligation. This is impossible as the purchaser never obtained legal rights to an alternate method of collection using the Security Instrument to secure the obligation.
The First Electronic Sale happened when the Loan Originator offers the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package to a prospective Buyer (Intangible Obligor/Seller/Securitizer) to offset a pre-arranged line-of-credit for the benefit of the Loan Originator.
The Buyer of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package conditionally agreed to accept as a tender of funds the conveyance of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package and takes control of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package as a transferable record that is not supported by law.
Pursuant to UCC Article 3-3203(d), when the First Transfer of Personal Property (UCC 8 Note-Payment Intangible) and the First Sale of the Intangible Obligation (payment stream, rights to future payments or beneficial interest) are bifurcated from the Tangible Obligation, rights to enforce the Tangible Obligation cease as the Tangible Obligation was not properly negotiated from the Loan Originator to the Intangible Obligor. The only rights conveyed are the rights to hold and possess the Tangible Obligation. An Intangible Obligor (Seller/Securitizer) cannot be a holder in due course of a properly secured UCC 3 instrument when the laws governing the Security Instrument are not followed.
UCC Article 9 does not govern the signatures on the Intangible Security Interest, Tangible Note or the Tangible Security Interest. UCC Article 9 governs the collection rights but the negotiation and transfer of an Intangible Obligation (payment stream) is governed by UCC Article 8. Therefore, negotiation of the UCC Article 8 instrument cannot be negotiated with an electronic signature attempting to transfer under UCC Article 9 and would therefore be invalid.
As future legal actions were not anticipated, the paper documents were either placed in storage (Custodial and Non-Custodial Custody) or destroyed.
This could be a major problem for parties attempting to foreclose because you must be in possession of the UCC Article 3 Paper Tangible Instruments (the wet ink signature note and mortgage) in order to foreclose on a piece of real property!
You not only have to have the Paper Tangible Instruments in your possession, you also must be the true “Holder in Due Course with Rights to Enforce”. Meaning you must have the legal rights to enforce the security provisions of the mortgage or deed of trust. However, if there you have a broken chain of title or clouded title due to the improper negotiating, transfer, and delivery of the mortgage loan contract then there may have been a lost of legal rights to enforce the mortgage lien.
Moreover, the electronic version of the paper documents is stored electronically as an eNote and tracked on a national database. The electronic database tracks who the UCC Article 8 Intangible Obligee is with personal property rights to the UCC Article 9. The electronic database does not track who has a vested legal interest in the Security Instrument as this is governed by State statutory law and typically remains vested in the name of the Mortgage Loan Originator.
If Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS) is involved, MERS is named as beneficiary or nominee agent to the Mortgage Loan Originator. Registration on the MERS system is required and when registered, an 18-digit Mortgage Identification Number “MIN” is created. The first seven digits identify the registering lender and the last digit is a checksum number. If the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package is registered in the MERS registry, there is no physical transfer of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package.
The MERS Registry updates information as to who has control and ownership rights of the electronic digitized file. If a Notice of Assignment reflecting the electronic negotiation is not filed with the County Recorder’s Office rights to the Security Instrument does not occur. There is no law requiring notice to be filed with the County Recorder’s Office upon the selling or buying of an eNote when dealing with personal property. However, when dealing with real property, compliance with UCC Article 9, the ESIGN Act and the UETA is required.
The Second Electronic Sale happens when the Seller/Securitizer of the Investment Vehicle sells or assigns the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package to the Buyer (depositor of the Investment Vehicle). The recipient of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package accepts the transfer and takes control of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package under the terms of the Trust.
The Third Electronic Sale occurs when the Buyer sells or assigns the Electronic Loan Package to the Trustee of the Investment Vehicle and takes control of the Electronic Mortgage Loan Package. The Depositor of the Investment Vehicle takes control of the Investment Trust’s Electronic Certificates under the rules of the Trust in exchange for selling or assigning the Electronic Mortgage Package.
Under UCC Article 8, the Intangible Obligee (REMIC Trust) must comply with State statutory requirements in order to have a perfected Security Interest and a continuous alternate method to collect future payments pledged by the Account Debtor. The Intangible Obligee must be assigned the rights to the Security Instrument according to State statutory law.
If the UCC Article 8 Intangible Obligee attempts to apply UCC Article 9 laws of perfection to support a legal claim to the Security Instrument, the claim is untenable as it is unlawful. This system of securitization is flawed as it provides the Account Debtor (Intangible Obligor) and the Original Account Debtor (Tangible Obligor) rights to the same instrument which is a legal and logical impossibility.
Upon default on the Intangible Obligation a Notice of Assignment is filed with the County Recorder’s Office. This Notice of Assignment allegedly transfers lien rights from the Original Mortgage Loan Originator (Tangible Obligee) to a third Intangible Assignee (Subsequent Intangible Obligor) who is usually the Trustee of the Mortgage Servicer. These filings are a fraud upon public records.
The perfection of lien rights (Perfected Chain of Title) does not match the Chain of Negotiation of the Tangible Note shown by endorsements or lack thereof and shows the Tangible Note is no longer secured by the Security Instrument as the Security Instrument becomes a nullity as an operation of law. The Trust is conveyed a transferrable record, leaving the Tangible Note, less the rights securing it which include the power of sale as would exist if the Security Instrument securing the UCC Article 3 Tangible Note was assigned in accordance to State statute. The ESIGN Act – 15 USC §7003 excludes instruments governed by the UCC Article 3, 8 and 9 or the State equivalent. Therefore, the intangible claim cannot be negotiated electronically. The Tangible Note and the continuous perfection of the Security Interest can only be pledged as an intangible interest in the payment stream of the UCC 8 instrument. The Intangible Payment Obligation can only be negotiated in paper form.
The fact is the requirements set forth in the pooling and servicing agreements were not followed, and they were not followed in the following way. The pooling and servicing agreements says that when the notes are transferred to the trust there needs to be an endorsement in blank to the trust, as well as a complete chain of endorsements for all proceeding transfers.
That means that the originator of the loan must have a specific endorsement transferring it from the securitization sponsor, the sponsor to the depositor, and then the depositor in blank to the trust.
What I am told is that in most of the cases that chain of endorsements is not there. There is simply a single endorsement in blank. That creates a problem because it does not comply with the trust documents.
That is a severe problem because most pooling and servicing agreements are trust that are governed by New York law, and New York law says that if you are not punctilious in following the trust documents for a transfer, the transfer is void. It doesn’t matter if you intended it or not, it’s void. That transfer is void, even if that transfer would have otherwise complied with law. And if the transfer is void that would mean that the trust does not own the mortgages, and therefore lacks standing to foreclose. It’s axiomatic that in order to bring a foreclose action the plaintiff must have legal standing. Only the mortgagee has such standing.
Thus, various problems like false or faulty affidavits, as well as back dated mortgage assignments, and altered or wholly counterfeited notes, mortgages, and assignments all relate to the evidentiary need to prove standing. Because without standing you have no authority to bring a foreclosure action in the first place!
HOW BANKS WIN
The banks and their attorneys are going to succeed by not having a properly perfected lien or Chain of Title, by stating that they negotiated the note in Bearer Form under Article UCC 3205 Sub section B with no payee named as a bearer instrument.
This essentially gives them a purported temporary perfection of the original holder, while they physically transfer the instrument, by daisy chain, which doesn’t require for them to maintain a Chain of Title, until the instrument is specially endorsed.
This is how the banks and their attorneys beat almost everybody from New York to California on standing, and whether or not they had a secured interest over the lien; because nobody has a the way to argue against whether or not they made the instrument of bearer paper and physically negotiated it, because they weren’t required to maintain a Chain of Title in that aspect.
So that’s how the banks and their attorneys can win nine times out of ten. Because what they’re saying is that in the negotiation under 3205 B, the security followed the note, whenever the custodian of record received the instrument prior to the cut-off date, making the note and the security securing trust property before the cut-off date. Here is the lie that the banks almost always defeat homeowners with: “Here’s a copy of the note your honour, the security follows the obligation we all know that.”
Yes, that’s accurate, under common law and U.S. Supreme Court. Carpenter v. Longan (1872) the note and mortgage are inseparable; the former as essential, the latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is a nullity.
Furthermore, under revised article 9 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) the banks do not necessarily have to record each transfer of the mortgage loan contract in public records; all they must do is be in possession of the note and they can claim rights to enforce it. That’s how the banks and their attorneys can beat you.
So, let’s reverse engineer this, let’s take that note all the way back to the closing, and reverse the whole concept and transaction. What you must be able to show is that you have one purported transaction, concealing the realistic transaction.
Did the lien’s beneficial interest maintain perfection, and was it therefore eligible to be negotiated with the note in that capacity, as statutorily required?
However, what that would require that you were the actual creditor and that you made that note as a maker issuer, for the purposes of being the beneficiary of the debt that was created. This is what the banks and their attorneys want you to believe in the matter of equity:
- That your signature was as a maker issuer and therefore created value to the instrument
- You negotiated with the party that you sat down at closing with
- They accepted the instrument by negotiation
- They were a federal reserved depository institution that could accept article three instruments by deposit
- They gave you consideration in the form of cash, not Ultra Vires, for your promise to pay instrument executing an underlying indebtedness contract
Well in an IRC 1031 Like Kind Exchange, Table Funded Securitized Mortgage Loan Transaction, that didn’t happen. That did not happen; that negotiation, acceptance and consideration is not what a table funded securitization transaction is!
So, the money is not created from your signature, negotiated and then the note negotiated between state to state physically, that doesn’t happen in a table funded transaction. Rather it’s in direct reverse engineer – the money was created from the sale of the certificates and the special deposit, special purpose vehicle on Wall Street.
They take the certificate holders funds to the securities to special deposit the pool of assets. That pool of assets is used in the SPV alternative investment opportunity through the warehouse line of credit, and that’s what the sponsor bank is using as the table funding credit in the transaction itself.
So yes, we would have some arguments like robo-signing and the improper negotiation, transfer, and delivery of the mortgage loan contract all the way through the securitization scheme, as part of the material defects found in the transactional scheme itself – but what we don’t want to do is provide any language as an admission to you being the account debtor.
You also want to make sure you understand what is meant by using terms like the “alleged debt”, because you’re going to piss the Judge off, badly; a lot of people do it. Because, they don’t know how to speak to the transaction as it relates to what that means.
So, let me give you the perspective that the Judge is going to have. The Judge is only looking at the intent of the contract.
So, all the little details, the semantics of this right now, the first thing the Judge is going to do, is look at it from a cursory equity standpoint.
Q: Did you intend to get a home
Q: Are you in a home?
Q: Okay, so you’re in the collateral.
Q: Okay and did you intend whenever you went to go get the home to get an obligation or a loan associated to that.
Okay, yes that’s obvious or else you wouldn’t be in the collateral
Q: Okay so you’re in the collateral – an obligation exists – and you also pledged a lien to encumber your property to secure that obligation, so that if you couldn’t perform on the contractual payment obligation the holder of the obligation would have the lien to enforce, do a foreclosure sale to enforce an ultimate means of collection.
Okay. So just looking at the intent of the contract, you are in the collateral, you know that you signed something at the closing- there’s an obligation – and it’s in default. The institutions claiming to be the holder of that obligation and to be the secured party of record via an assignment of the security instrument perfected in public record.
Are there any other parties that are involved in this transaction?
No! And if some other financial institution was holding an obligation and saw that deed of trust or signed with a deed of trust recorded on public record, they would immediately file to acquire the title and they would be there defending their right to the obligation and the collateral itself.
So, because there’s no other financial institution showing up claiming to be the holder and to having a subsequent assignment of deed of trust or mortgage recorded for enforcing through a foreclosure action – than nine times out of ten – the Judge is going to give the party holding the obligation the benefit of the doubt as a matter of the intent of the contract. Therefore, in terms of the intent of the contract, this is where it becomes so viable for you to understand, what your capacity into the transaction is. When the judge asks you:
“Did you sign the note – in the effort to get the collateral?”
Your answer is “Yes.” – But you need to be able to specify the answer to yes as “well yes your honour but I’m not the account debtor. I signed into this transaction as an accommodation party or guarantor. The party that I signed as a guarantor for, made available the obligation through a securitization transaction without my knowledge and purportedly negotiated the security evidence by the deed of trust/mortgage lien that I pledged to them, uniquely, to secure these receivables in this transaction as well.
What I need to know your honour is does my lien secure the tangible contractual obligation or does it secure the receivables?”
The answer to the receivables is no. You cannot attach article 9 to the UCC receivables (securities) to enforce a lien on real property. A lien on real property under revised article nine is not secured by a lien on real property, so article nine does not fit the common law argument that the transfer of an obligation carries the beneficial interest of the lien and the lien itself.
Therefore, you need to be able to be able to explain (and prove) how your capacity is to the obligation. “Your honour I am not the account debtor. I was a guarantor to this party. I am not a guarantor to everybody else that claims to be the holder of the obligation”
And it’s their capacity of an accommodated party to the certificate holders on Wall Street. They’re not the real creditors. Their job is to put the certificate holders into funds associated to your payment string. All of this is predicated on laying the proper order of operations, in line with statutory capacities, that clearly part and parcel and separate the root question of: Does revised article nine and liens on real property secured defaulted receivables in a securitization transaction?
That’s your root question. You just must be able to have it all put in the proper sequence in statutory capacities, as it relates to your state, and what took place in order to defend the lien itself the property. How have you been harmed?
In pre-foreclosure it’s not so much that you’ve been harmed, it’s whether they have clean hands in the transaction. So, this, at its root is an Equitable Estoppel issue. In the like kind exchange transactional scheme there is a senior secured party and a junior secured party – the originator of the loan (named on the note as the lender) is the senior secured party, and the trustee for the REMIC trust is the junior secured party.
But it’s one transactional scheme, it’s one organism, so you must be able to show that they – in the race of diligence – that the junior secured party made sure that the originator recorded that underlying security of trust, so they could perform the rest of the transaction. But ten years later upon default of the receivables, to cause an assignment of the beneficial interest of evidence about your underlying security instrument, that security instrument doesn’t maintain perfection from now, until infinity. You can lose perfection over that lien.
So, having the proper capacity, order of operations, and then statement of facts of how they lost perfection, and to show that it is inequitable for the holder of the receivables to attempt to cause an assignment of the underlying security instrument, because they were only negotiated the receivables, with unclean hands. That’s what you must show that they don’t have an equitable claim to.
Hypothecation is a third-party pledging collateral on your behalf. So, let’s say for instance, if you pledged the real property to the originator party on the ten thirty-one exchange transaction scheme you specifically gave legal title to that party. Not to the trustee under that instrument, and the beneficiary of the security instrument. The beneficiary of the security instrument then in turn pledged a separate and subsequent value – which is the proceeds of the real property.
Let me give you an example. Consider a wheat field. The land is the real property, but the Wheat and the Harvest are the proceeds of the real property. In this securitization transaction the original secured party is granting the proceeds, the actual required collateral to the real property and hypothecating that proceed as the payment intangible, which is the transferable record on the obligation.
So, you must be able to show that it’s under revised article nine; it does not apply to liens on real property. It may apply to title loans, student loans, and unsecured obligations, but it does not apply to liens on real property.
Remember, it’s either you sold the contract in its entirety to a successor and interest through a true sale; or you sold the underlying tangible value of the contract. Remember when people paid off their loans and they received their notes and their deed back, and they would have deed burning parties?
That doesn’t happen anymore because that transactional scheme where that was your note, that you made and negotiated with a bank that could accept it, deposit it, and give you real money for a loan so you could purchase the property. That’s the savings and loan model.
In that transaction the bank you contracted with risked giving you real money and was going to hold that thirty-year instrument until its full rate of return. Its portfolio division wanted to buy that obligation and they underwrote you as your credit worthiness and they gave you the loan. You had skin in the game, you qualified financially, and they were willing to take a risk on you. That was a real contract between you and the bank.
But what happened with the securitization bubble is they lifted the Glass–Steagall Act and the Gramm Bliley Leach Act and they made way for this transactional scheme were they could divert the risk of creating the money, which was done by lying and cheating the certificate holders through a perspective supplement which was pre-fabricated on the yield spread of those securities, under the nineteen thirty three, thirty four Security and Exchange act.
So, they went to Standards & Poor’s and they got all those credit enhancements and they pre-sold those securities. Well that’s what the special deposit is for the REMIC trust, the trust vehicle; the special purpose vehicle. So, through special deposit, they generated those funds with the sale of the securities, that’s what makes the credit swaps available for the sponsor bank, to work with the originator to the table fund transaction.
Once you’re able to understand the blue print of the transaction and then you set the order of operations in place, and then you couch the interested parties, and then couch their capacity, and then what are they negotiating and what’s its statutory intangible interest, and what governs that, and once you set the mouse trap in place, and it can follow the order of operation it’s not that complicated.
To get to the root question you just must be able to see all of that and to be able to understand the root question. The root question is “in what capacity did you sign the note (as maker/issuer) or as an (accommodation party/guarantor)?
If your loan was part of a table funded securitized transaction where the note and mortgage were converted into a mortgage backed security and sold to a Wall Street trust, then you signed the note as a guarantor, accommodation party, not the account debtor; and therefore, the security instrument (mortgage/deed of trust) is void ab initio (from the beginning). The security instrument would be meaningless without an underlying indebtedness between the parties to the contact.
THE CHESHIRE CAT & DR. WHO
Even though everything in the last few chapters is true, many judges are not open to entertaining this fact pattern or legal argument, perhaps because they think that could undermine the entire housing market and U.S economy. However, there is simple more straightforward way to challenge a foreclosure sale and overturn the tables on the money-changers!
Standing is the ability of a party to bring a lawsuit in court based upon their stake in the outcome. A party seeking to demonstrate standing must be able to show the court enough connection to and harm from the law or action challenged. Standing cannot be proven out of the mouth of the Agent. Standing can only be proven out of the mouth of the Principal! So, if someone is attempting to foreclose on your real property the first question you should ask is: Who Are You?
Many homeowners have asked their lenders/servicers to show them the note, only to discover they cannot produce them. We have good reason to believe that many of the notes were destroyed because the Bankers Association testified to the Florida Supreme Court in case NO. 09-1460, that “the reason many firms file lost note counts as a standard alternative pleading in the complaint is because the physical document was deliberately eliminated to avoid confusion immediately upon its conversion to an electronic file.”
Unfortunately, some judges have decided banks and servicers can foreclose without the original wet ink signature note. Federal courts however require creditors to have the real promissory note(s) if they wish to claim that they are a secured party of interest. But it’s not just about having the wet ink signature note, more important is dose the party foreclosing have a properly perfected lien, or are they the holder of the note in due course with rights to enforce?
To help you determine if the party attempting to collect on the note or foreclose on your home has a perfected lien (mortgage / deed of trust) and if they are the holder of the note in due course with rights to enforce FRAUD STOPPERS PMA can conduct a mortgage fraud analysis, Bloomberg securitization audit, or chain of title investigation.
Another way to get to the bottom of the rabbit hole is to challenge the legal standing, capacity, and agency of the party claiming they hold the note, or are attempting to foreclose, in federal court under the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA).
Recent lawsuits filed against law firms who collect debts under the FDCPA reveals the liabilities assumed by lawyers who, knowing that there are defects in their clients legal standing, pursues it anyway. In many foreclosure cases lawyers have entered into contracts with loan servicers and banks to foreclosure on properties knowing their clients lack the legal standing to initiate the foreclosure proceedings.
These law firms had to know that documents that they referenced or attached to their pleadings were either fabricated by the banks or fabricated by others on behalf of the banks. The lawyers had to know that the “client” was not the real Plaintiff or Claimant. Nevertheless, they dishonestly continued acting as if the named Plaintiff existed and had a valid claim. The reason they had to know is because lawyers are required to do due diligence to know with 100% certainty that the named plaintiff exists and that filing a lawsuit or sending out notices on behalf of such clients without having been retained by them, is legal and valid.
For example, naming Bank of New York Mellon as trustee, when there is no trust is a breach of fiduciary responsibility. Naming or implying the existence of a trust when it does not exist is also a breach and cause of action against the lawyers representing the foreclosing party.
Such actions are violations of the FDCPA. The banks have seemingly suckered lawyers into handling debt collection and foreclosure actions without disclosing the fact that they (the lawyers) can be held liable for multiple violations of state and Federal laws.
“Victory comes from finding opportunities in problems.” – Sun Tzu, The Art of War.
“Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.
If you want to stop foreclosure and mortgage fraud you need to find out what cards the other side is holding. One of the first things we recommend you do is demand that your lender or current loan servicer give you a copy of every document they have for your loan file. Often loan servicers do not have the documents they need to foreclose. Sometimes they give fabricated, forged, documents with robo-signed signatures and incorrect fraudulent information. In fact, when one of our Private Members requested their loan servicer provide them copies of all the documents they had on file, the loan servicer sent a copy of their alleged promissory note that contained different loan amounts and different closing dates than those that were on their original loan agreement. Can you imagine what how a bank’s lawyer would explain this to a judge and jury?
You can begin to ask this important Who Are You question by way of sending informal discovery “demand letters” that can include:
- Error Resolution & Information Request (ERIR) Letters
- Federal Debt Validation Letters
- Qualified Written Request (QWR) Letters
- Tort Letters
- Truth in Lending Act (TILA) Rescission Letters
If you are the defendant in a foreclosure lawsuit you can (and should) challenge your opponents’ Standing with motions and discovery tools such as: Request for Admissions, Request for Productions, Interrogatories, Depositions, and Subpoenas.
The main question to ask is: Who Are You? and What Legal Rights Do You Have to Foreclose on My Property? Show me the note, and prove to me that you have legal Standing, Capacity, and Agency to bring this foreclosure action in front of the court.
FRAUD STOPPERS Private Administrative Process is a targeted approach to Informal Discovery under UCC 3-501. PRESENTMENT or your States equivalent.
We start with a Mortgage Error Resolution/Request for Information (ERIR Letter). If you believe there is an error on your mortgage loan statement or you’d like to request information related to your mortgage loan servicing, you must exercise certain rights under Federal law related to resolving errors and requesting information about your mortgage loan. If you think your credit report, bill or your mortgage loan account contains an error, or if you need more information about your mortgage loan, you send a written letter concerning your error and/or request.
Usually the loan servicers will not respond to your “informal discovery requests” in accordance to law. And that’s a good thing! Remember to never interrupt your opponent when they are screwing up. This can give you an advantage when you take legal action. The courts are supposed to be a remedy of last resort: meaning they want you to try and work things out administratively before bringing the issue to the court.
If you are forced to take legal action against your lender or loan servicer, and you can show the judge that you tried to work things out, but they were nonresponsive to your lawful request, or left you no other option but to file suit, you can start off on better footing, rather than if you just filed the lawsuit to start with. Plus, in conducting your informal discovery process you may be able to obtain damning evidence and material facts needed to exhibit to your complaint and win your case. Remember “Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake.”
When dealing with the banks there are two rules to remember:
1. We never ask them to do anything that we expect them to do.
2. We never ask them to do anything they’re not required by law to do.
So, I’m going to ask you to do this thing…
But I’m really hoping you don’t do what I am asking you to do.
Because then I can land on you like a ton of bricks!
However, if you are going to try this you must always be at least two moves in front of your opponent. FRAUD STOPPERS can help you.
One of the advantages of using this technique is it can prevent you from getting frustrated if (and when) the bank doesn’t do what you are asking them to do. Instead you might even get excited, because if, and when, they violate the law by not responding properly to your informal discovery request you could end up with even more leverage against them.
We have found the banks and loan servicers almost never respond to our informal discovery “demand letters” the way the law dictates they respond. They usually send you a non-responsive answer.
FRAUD STOPPERS Administrative Process (Informal Discovery) is designed to catch the banks screwing up, so you can increase your odds of success. This process can help you stop or stall the banks collection efforts (including stopping a foreclosure sale if one is imminent) and buy you the necessary time to lay the necessary groundwork for a lawsuit demanding special or compensatory damages and equitable relief for clear and marketable title to your home.
Now let’s talk about the foreclosure laws as they relate to everybody. If you have received a Notice of Default (NOD) or Notice of Acceleration (NOA), then time is short, and you need to do something fast. And the only thing that will get the banks attention is a lawsuit. If you have an impending sale there are several things you can do. If you haven’t done anything concerning the foreclosure process yet, there are some things you must do simultaneously.
The first thing you want to do is send out several letters. Whoever is attempting to foreclosure on you, on that person you should send a debt validation letter (DVL). Often, a debt validation letter (DVL) will stall the foreclosure. Because when a debt validation letter is filed, the lender is obligated by the Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) to validate the debt.
A presentment under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) is defined as a demand for payment on a debt in us dollars. If your sent a presentment (a demand for payment) from anyone, you may dispute the debt with that person, and if you send them a letter stating that you dispute the debt and a demand that the claimant prove up their claim, then the debt collector is required to seize all collection efforts until they have proved up the claim.
So, if your lender is in the process of foreclosure, and you send them a debt validation letter, they’re going to claim that in this case they are not debt collectors, but in fact they are merely attempting to recover collateral. The courts across the country are split on this issue. Some states say yes, they are a debt collector, and some say no they are not a debt collector. For our purpose we don’t care either way, because we’re going to make the claim and by law once the demand is made, they must prove up their position either way. The issue that we’ve been making with the lawsuits we’ve been helping people produce is that they are a debt collector until they show that they are not a debt collector. Usually they like to reply with a Rule 12 (motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim), alleging that they are NOT debt collectors and therefore they do not fall under the FDCPA.
So, the argument that we’re making here is that in order to implement the intent of the legislator (and that intent was to prevent someone with no claim on a debt from collecting on a debt), you are demanding they prove their position.
If you have a debt with GMAC and I call you from Joe Blow collections or send you a letter claiming I’m collecting for GMAC and you need to send all your future payments to me. Well if you send your payments to them and they are not collecting for GMAC the payments you send to them do not extinguish the debt; and that’s in the Uniform Commercial Code.
You see the foreclosure mills and the banks agents are trying to squeeze in under that exclusion and claim that they are not trying to collect money; rather they are attempting to recover property. But in order to recover the property you must get a notice of intent to foreclose in the form of a notice of default (NOD) and opportunity to cure the default (by paying money). This is stated in the mortgage.
Now we are saying that makes you a debt collector. Because the bank is saying you better pay a certain amount in U.S. dollars, or else they will become a collateral collections agent, and take the property as collateral. So, the argument you will be making to the court is even if the jurisdiction says that the debt collector, and the foreclosure agent falls under the exclusion, until such time as they prove that they are in that position, they fall under the FDCPA.
That’s why one of the things you get when you join FRAUD STOPPERS PMA is a Federal FDCPA complaint that challenges your opponent’s Standing, Capacity, and Agency under the federal law and demands $100,000 in financial compensation!
These informal discovery documents include:
- A Tort Letter to stop a foreclosure sale, if one is imminent.
- An Error Resolution & Information Request Letter (ERIR Letter): that demands physical inspection of the original, wet-ink-signature loan documents
- A Professionally prepared Qualified Written Request Letter (QWR Letter): to uncover and verify accounting errors & violations
- Two Federal Debt Validation Letters to help you get the material facts needed to exhibit to complaint and lay the necessary groundwork for a federal FDCPA lawsuit.
- And a TILA Rescission Letter that you can use to rescind or cancel your mortgage loan contract using the federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) and recent groundbreaking United States Federal Supreme Court Case Decision Jesinoski v. Countrywide
Regarding the TILA Rescission Letter, the supreme court ruled unanimously in Jesinoski v. Countrywide that the moment your TILA Rescission Letter is mailed your mortgage loan contracted is rescinded (or canceled). They cease to exist as a matter of law. Furthermore, if the bank, creditor, or servicer wants to challenge the rescission they only have 20 days to do so and that must be done in federal court.
We have never seen the banks do this. What they almost always do is send a letter to you stating that you cannot rescind the loan because you are past the 3-year status of limitations (SOL). The banks standard response to a TILA rescission letter states: “TILA provides that if required notices or material disclosures are not delivered to the consumer, the right to rescind shall expire three (3) years after consummation of the loan…” and therefore you are past the SOL and cannot rescind this loan.
However, under paragraph (i) of TILA the SOL clock resets upon a notice of default (NOD) or foreclosure notice. Moreover, what if there was never an actual loan consummated within the appropriate legal definition of consummation? FRAUD STOPPERS TILA rescission letter claims that no real loan between the alleged borrower and loan originator ever existed in the first place, and no loan has been consummated within the appropriate legal definition of consummation, and therefore the bank’s SOL defense would be a meaningless argument.
HOW TO WIN IN COURT
If you go into court Pro Se (without an attorney), and you are ignorant about due process or how to win a lawsuit, you can bank of the fact that the judge will probably rule against you, out of hand, and at every turn, just because your pro se. On the other hand, if you go into court with an attorney ignorant about how to win a lawsuit, your attorney could screw you royally, because they could end up losing your case, and make you pay for it too!
Therefore, legal education is paramount! After all, if you are playing a game and you didn’t know what the rules of the game are, how can you win? What if your opponent is cheating, how can you stop them, if you don’t know what the rules of the game are? If you go into court against the banks (with an attorney or without) and you are legally ignorant, absent some miracle, you are not going to win. And if you do win, you will not win as big as you could, if you knew how to win in court!
Every day we hear “the courts are corrupt”, “judges are on the side of the banks”, “lawyers are liars”, and “you can’t win against the banks”.
However, there are hundreds of thousands of winning cases against the banks. One of the strategies to winning is learning how to properly lay your case out, documenting all the appealable errors, so you can win on appeal.
In fact, one of the insider’s secrets is that when the judge realizes what you are doing, (laying the case out for appeal) and they will, they will often rule in your favor, even if they weren’t going to initially, just so they are not overturned at the appellate level. Having too many overturned cases could hinder a judge’s career advancement opportunities. Yes, it’s true some judges that are on the verge of retirement may not care about career advancement opportunities, but for the most part the average judge does.
If you knew your opponent was going to violate the rules, every chance they got, that is not necessarily a bad thing, if you know what the rules are, and you know how to land on them like a ton of bricks when they do. In order to do that you must get legally educated.
For over 20 years the How to Win in Court legal education curriculum has been teaching Pro Se litigants how to win their cases. At this point we have thousands of testimonials of average everyday people who have won their case without an attorney after taking and learning this material. You see the fact is that our legal system has checks and balances built into it that can afford you the legal remedy you deserve, if you take the time to learn the rules of the game.
If you go into court Pro Se, and you are ignorant, you are going to lose.
If you go into court with an attorney, and you are ignorant, you could lose and pay for it too! Therefore, do not go into court ignorant.
Now you can learn how to win your case with or without a lawyer! If you have a lawyer, you can learn how to control your lawyer so that you’re properly represented. If you don’t have a lawyer, you can learn what you must do for yourself to win. All the basics of how to deal with the court system in an easy 24-hour course. This is a must for all pro-se litigants, or anyone fighting to stop a foreclosure or sue the banks for mortgage fraud and foreclosure fraud. The How to Win in Court Course includes:
- 3 In-Depth Video Tutorials
- 25 Downloadable MP3 Audio Clips
- Free Online Legal Research
- Legal Research Hints & Tips
- How to Use Evidence Rules
- Effective Written Motions
- Effective Spoken Motions
- Affirmative Defenses
- Complaints & Causes of Action
- Essential Courtroom Objections
- Appeals Procedure with Forms
- Summary Judgment Motions
- Summary Judgment Defenses
- Trial Procedure
- How to Handle Witnesses
- Frequently Used Forms
- Criminal Defense
- Property Law
- Contract Law
- How to Collect Judgments
- Official Rules of Court
- Standard Pleadings
- Discovery of Evidence
- How to Hire a Lawyer
- How to Control Lawyers and Judges
- Common Law Maxims
- Natural Law Theory
- Final Exam
- Plus, Much More!
If you have a lawyer … get what you’re paying for. If you don’t have a lawyer … know what YOU must do to win! Learn simplified time-tested strategies to winning. Sample forms with complete explanations. Step-by-step instructions written in plain English!
- Learn how to control your attorney.
- Learn how to control your opponent’s attorney.
- Learn how to control the judge.
- Learn everything you need to know to win your case (with or without an attorney) from A to Z
- Learn how to enforce due process and enforce your legal rights in less than 30 hours of studying. If you study one hour a day, in less than a month, you can learn how to win your case.
- learn State or federal courts – civil or criminal. Foreclosure, debt collection, family law, fraud, breach of contract, tax problems … all cases!
Over 10,000 people have already learned how to win their case with this program. Here are a few testimonials:
I am an attorney. Impressive. Eric Olsen
A valuable public service. University of Florida law professor.
Useful. I highly recommend it. The Alliance, Boynton Beach
A guide to the rules attorneys follow in civil lawsuits. The Charlotte Observer
A simplified course in the basics. Sun-Sentinel, Fort Lauderdale.
The prose is readable, flowing, and sometimes breathless. Times Union, Albany, NY
A seemingly gargantuan project to reverse ill feelings and disconnect between the public and the legal community. World Net Daily
Your page was chosen to be highlighted as Web-Star’s What’s Hot Now for Wednesday 7/22/98. Continued success for your superb site. H. Barton, V.P., Web-Star
Wow! A lot got unknotted through the use of simple language, for which I cannot thank you enough. M. Bock.
Thank you for your tremendously valuable help to the common man. Mark Moorehouse
I can’t thank you enough for sharing the many wisdoms enclosed in your Jurisdictionary materials. They have helped me a great deal in understanding not only law but Justice as well. Thank you. You are a rare credit to the profession, and I want you to know you have an appreciative customer and fan. Eddy Spencer
Your idea is exactly what this country needs, and we will get the word out! You are on the right track. Judy B.
My wife and I just want to let you know that we are so grateful to have come across your class Evidence Simplified. You did an excellent job. It is well written and very easy to understand. It is just wonderful! The way you explained the application of the rules was so effective that we as plaintiffs pro se came away empowered and with some good ammunition ready to apply with confidence for our upcoming motion hearing. We are energized and ready to fight for what’s right and fair. We thank you for sharing your knowledge of the American Justice System the way you do. We definitely will tell all our friends about this found knowledge. Arcenio A.
My compliments. The information and depth of knowledge are truly remarkable. You are doing a valuable public service. M. Collins
What a great site! Thanks for helping all of us who study law. N. Schumacher.
I want to thank the attorney for Jurisdictionary. In a law suit I filed in Superior Court about a probate matter, my attorney deliberately failed to do discovery, although the other side forged documents and lied. My principle lawsuit was in the Superior Court. But I was also a beneficiary in an open probate of a will whose co-executors were also the defendants in the Superior Court. By familiarizing myself on probate rules for discovery and using Jurisdictionary, I was able to file a motion for production of documents and got some of the documents which my attorney should have requested through discovery through the Superior Court. Thanks again. Byron Miller
Thank you for all your hard work. J. Lowry
Thank you for the excellent tutorials from Jurisdictionary. They’ve been a tremendous help in understanding what it’s all about. I recommend them to friends interested in learning the principles of law and legal processes. E. Johnson
Thank you for the great teachings. Truly inspiring. L. Calejo
Wonderful information presented in a light-hearted and very realistic way. Very helpful. I REALLY UNDERSTAND. Keep up the good work. Patty
Thank you for the magnificent work you have done … a true legacy of great value to posterity. D. Wilson
I am very impressed with how it simplifies matters yet explains thoroughly – a great handbook for the fundamentals. J.D. Wheeler
Wow! I wish I’d found this several weeks ago! Tremendously helpful! DKH
The concept of ‘The Rules’ is great! H. Taylor
What is most compelling is how simple it is. It really strikes me as ‘self-evident’, just as you say. I think you’re onto something! Douglas W.
I’m amazed by what I’ve read. Thank you for your simple explanations. Carrie K.
Good Stuff! I’m still going through it, but it’s helped a lot so far. J.E. Dixon
Your writings on these topics are so straightforward, it’s exhilarating to read them. Clearly this is from your heart via your head, with your full attention at both points. Excellent work. Jamie J.
Thank you very much for your great work. D. Wilson
I am so impressed with the simplicity. For us legal dummies your breakdown of terminology and attractive format are most appreciated. Thank you, thank you, thank you. Alice S.
I enjoy your writings. Well thought. Well said. D. Meador
Thanks. Jurisdictionary has increased my understanding several hundred-fold. V. Wright
I’ve been empowered by your unselfish outlay of civil procedure rules and principles. Thanks. Barbara
The information is immensely helpful. Thank you. Paulette H.
Great! Joe & Cheryl B.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Jurisdictionary is wonderful! Lena W.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you – for providing this valuable work. I refer to it often. It has helped me on many occasions to get a grasp of the litigation process and to increase my understanding of the use of strategies. Most importantly it has helped me stay centered when I drift off course. J. Harvey
I am truly impressed. You have included some very helpful information. No one can afford to be ignorant about legalities these days. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Melissa H.
I would like to thank you for making this material available to everyone seeking truth and justice. Thanks for teaching us to Lift the Lamp Higher! H.R. Dal Dosso
I applaud your efforts. Best wishes. R. Jark
I write to express my gratitude for the invaluable information and effort you give to make education available regarding justice. Debra H.
Very appealing. Nice job. Jerry M.
I’m learning as I go. Jurisdictionary has provided such a clear view of what lies ahead I cannot thank you enough. What can I do to help you continue to provide support and understanding? J. Rice
Jurisdictionary is a very creative and refreshing idea. It’s a great community service. Betty P.
Great idea! I agree wholeheartedly with your mission. Gino F.
Thank you for all you’re doing. You’re an inspiration! May A.
You are to be commended for your work letting people know their rights. S. Rize
Wonderful! R. Williams
Great information! L.B. Davidson
We are very thankful for the information. It gives us focus and information we have not been able to obtain anywhere. Thank you. M. Czerniakowski
Thank you for the Jurisdictionary. It has certainly been helpful for me to be able to learn more about the judicial system. D. Fletcher
I think you have a great idea and that it will grow. Patricia M.
This is the kind of ‘education’ that will really help people. Douglas
I will finish reading the Jurisdictionary. It is very interesting and worthy of my time. Laurel
You are a great help! A. Hunt
It is my sincere hope that your project gets the support it needs. … Debbie
Definitely gives me hope. Jeff N.
I love your work. Brent B.
Great idea! Gino
I want to help spread the word! Derby
Wish I had read your Jurisdictionary at 20 instead of at 40. J. Roberts
Very helpful. Thank you! Jerry
Please keep up the great work. I will pass the word. Outstanding. M. Sinclair
I will do what I do best: spread the word to individuals in need. Like a chain letter, it may start out small, but it will do some very personal good to everyone it touches. Thank you! Katherine B.
I will carry your message wherever I can. We are seeking justice. R. Bibace
What you are doing is great! Keep it up. Ordinary citizens, like myself, should have an easy and inexpensive way to learn and understand the legal system to which we are required to conform. Jeffrey E.
Jurisdictionary wisdom is pointing me in the right direction. Thanks. Gail H.
A new tool that cracks the code of procedural rules that has been needed for years. Hans K.
Empowering people by making legal recourse economically available can save lives. Capt. S. Carr
I am energized. The maxims hit home with me. Joe F.
Extremely helpful. You have helped me understand the need (and given the how-to) to focus my legal complaint. This is great information. I will be sure to let others know. Very understandable and informative. Great job. Deborah L.
Jurisdictionary has helped me learn about the judicial system. Dean F.
Salute! As a former journalist, I wish every major media organization would make the MAXIMS required reading! Chuck
It has given me new hope that we will be able to obtain justice in the case that we are involved in at this time. Thank you. W. Tomkinson
Thank you for giving me that little glimmer of hope that someone in the law does care about justice of the people and for the people. M. Petersen
I am enjoying your work. After I spent an hour looking it over, I called a friend and got him to check it out. He is enjoying it now, too. Rest assured I will refer others. D. Phillips
A job well done. Richard
You are performing a great service! I wish there was a way to get this information to those who most desperately need it. I’ll do my part by telling others. Katherine
I believe everyone would benefit from it and appreciate knowing about it. D. Phillips
I commend your goals. Gene
What a wonderful happenstance I found this site. P. Girardin
Thank you for the magnificent work you have done. A true legacy of great value to posterity. D. Wilson
You are to be commended for your work in letting the people know what their individual rights are. S.D. Rize
The ability to make people think in a positive way. Yes, we are on the same page. T. Burns
As others have already noted … great. Al & Sandy M.
I would like to express my appreciation for the time and effort you expended. The information you provided was well organized and written. It really clarifies many of the intricacies of wading through the legal system for me. In fact, I intend to share it with my children. I know it will help many people. B. Rosenthal
I wish to applaud your superb efforts. Congratulations! Thankfully someone has taken on this important initiative. C.G. Rigney
I congratulate you on your efforts to make law more accessible. Ron
Well written for lay people. It’s not putting us lawyers out of work, fortunately. It might even help us. Oktavia
Finally! I will never again find myself behind the legal 8-ball. Keep up the good work. Ed
Thank you! Continued success with your fine resource. Howard
Jurisdictionary is valuable for those in need of encouragement and advice in things of the legal system. I will pass the word. I’ve been thinking about having my 11-year-old son check it out. He won’t understand all of it, but some of it would make sense to him. Michael H.
I was impressed. Lindy
More power to you. We needed this. Allen
Excellent. J. Kreimer
I am impressed! Arthur
Thank you and God bless you! S. Poindexter
I love your work. Sheryl P.
Just the thing for many people needing to understand how the system works. Thanks. Bob M.
You have an admirable mission. We hope you will succeed. Please add my name to your mailing list. J.H. Guth, PhD
It’s wonderful. Thank you for what must be a labor of love. D. Brown
I would really like to take a moment of my time to extend a round of applause to Jurisdictionary. While driving to Miami, I noticed your billboard from the corner of my eye. It struck a chord with me. I was totally amazed about how little I actually know of my rights. I just want to thank you for helping me to be better informed as to how to handle situations that have caused disruption in my life from my ignorance of the system. I strongly believe the information I obtained from Jurisdictionary will enhance my chances in the future for better representation and understanding how to work the system in my favor. Sincerely. … M. Lewandowski
I’m really glad I purchased Jurisdictionary. … Capt. W. Brown
Jurisdictionary works! Went to court today and won as a pro se litigant against a silver tongued, high profile, powerful attorney. Even the other attorneys in the gallery were buzzing about it. Thanks for showing me how to win in court on facts rather than fighting on issues that don’t work. … K. Anderson
Wow! I wish I’d found this several weeks ago! Tremendously helpful. … DKH
I’m amazed. Thank you for your simple explanations. Carrie K.
Thank you for simplifying and reinforcing what I had to go to graduate and law school to learn. L. Dixon
What student of the law would not love Jurisdictionary? Michelle
If only I’d known this information 6 weeks sooner! Bryan
Learn How to Save Time and Money, and Increase Your Odds of Success, with the #1 Selling Pro-Se Legal Education Course since 1997.
Get Yours Right Now for Only $249
LAWYERS, LIARS, & LOSERS
Now even after you learn How to Win in Court you will undoubtedly have legal questions that pop up from time to time that are best answered by a competent local attorney. You should not take legal advice from a non-attorney, no matter how smart they sound.
However, when it comes to lawyers there are two problems to consider: The first problem is NO lawyer on earth is an expert in every area of law. The second problem is most lawyers charge around $250 per hour for their time. Fortunately, FRAUD STOPPERS has found a simple affordable solution that solves both problems.
What if you could pick up your phone and call a quality attorney in your state to get all your legal questions answered, and get legal advice, any time you needed without getting a big bill in the mail, would you?
If so we recommend you consider joining Legalshield because for about a $1/day (around $25/month) you can get instant access to a quality law firm in your state that can assist you with all your legal needs. Legalshield attorneys have an average of 19 years of experience and are paid in advance which means they are motivated and obligated to provide the best possible legal assistance.
If you do not already have an attorney (or even if you do) we recommend that you get a membership to Legalshield; because for about a $1/day your Legalshield appointed law firm can give you:
- Unlimited Advice and Consultation
- Letters and Phone Calls on Your Behalf
- Personal Document Review
- Trial Defense
- Document Preparation
- Standard Will Preparation
- Residential Loan Document Assistance
- Auto Accidents
- Moving Traffic Violations
- Family Matters
- Adoption Representation
- Separation Representation
- Divorce Representation
- IRS Audit Legal Services
- And More!
These are just some of the things that are covered by your Legalshield plan. But one of the best parts of your plan is that you get 60 hours of trial representation for any covered claims. For any legal issue that is not covered by your Legalshield Plan you can get a 25% discount on attorney fees.
Legalshield has been providing affordable legal protection for over 40 years. Now with over 4 million users, LegalShield not only provides legal services in 49 states and 4 Canadian Provinces; but also, it provides confidence and peace of mind for families everywhere. For one low monthly fee our members gain access to quality law firms without having to worry about high hourly costs. Because Legalshield attorneys are all paid in advance, they provide the same level of service for trivial or traumatic legal situations.
With humble beginnings in Ada, Oklahoma, LegalShield has now grown to a 170,000-square-foot corporate office on an 80-acre campus with over 650 dedicated employees. Legalshield leaders have decades of experience and our goal remains the same, to create a world where everyone can access legal protection, and everyone can afford it. Legalshield is taking legal representation and making some revisions— in the form of accessible, affordable, full service coverage. Finally, you can live life knowing you have a law firm in your back pocket who, at the same time, isn’t emptying it.
Legalshield also offers the world-class identity theft protection and credit monitoring service because Identity theft impacts millions of people each year. Criminals are using a variety of scams & hacks to collect & steal your personal information. Dark web, social and identity and credit monitoring are all part of our service. Should your identity be stolen, we offer full restoration services as part of your membership.
In addition to benefiting from all the membership benefits you will get as a Legalshield member, you can also enroll as a Legalshield associate so you can sell Legalshield as a solo associate or lead your own team. The flexibility of Legalshield’ sales model means however you choose to sell, you define your business opportunity with fast cash upfront commissions directed deposited into your checking account daily, and long-term walk-a-way residual income wealth building opportunities that can impact your financial wellbeing for generations to come.
Get your Legalshield membership right now and get instant access to a local attorney who can answer all your legal questions and help you with your all your legal needs. Plus, you can also become a LegalShield representative and make money for helping others get affordable legal protection. Learn more and activate your plan at
HOW FRAUD STOPPERS CAN HELP
FRAUD STOPPERS Private Members Association (PMA) is dedicated to helping you learn how to stop foreclosure and mortgage fraud. We have a proven way to help you save time and money and increase your odds of success in getting the legal remedy that the law entitles you too and that you deserve! Stop Foreclosure Fraud & Mortgage Fraud; and Cancel Secured and Unsecured Debt Obligations through Strategic Litigation.
FRAUD STOPPERS Private Members Association’s Mortgage Fraud Investigator can analysis your mortgage loan documents for violations of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) and other signs of mortgage fraud to help you determine if your current mortgage loan situation qualifies for one of our Private Members Only foreclosure defense and mortgage fraud products or services.
Our primary focus is helping our members get clear and marketable title to their property by arguing that the actions of the banks have made the security provisions of the mortgage/deed of trust unenforceable as a matter of law.
Our Association of member’s main objective is to maintain and improve the civil rights, constitutional guarantees and political freedom for every member and citizen of the United States of America. We believe that the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America guarantees our members free speech, petition, assembly, and the right to gather together for the lawful purpose of advising and helping one another in asserting our rights under the Federal and State Constitutions and Statutes.
Your FRAUD STOPPERS PMA Membership includes:
- Mortgage Fraud Analysis & Bloomberg Securitization Search
- A UCC Mortgage Fraud Report (if applicable)
- Potential Cause of Action Consultation
- Federal FDCPA Debt Validation Letters
- Qualified Written Request (QWR) Letter
- Error Resolution and Information Request (ERIR) Letter
- Federal FDCPA lawsuit
- FBI Bank Fraud Package
- Tort Letter (to stop a foreclosure sale)
- Federal Truth in Lending Act (TILA) Rescission Letter
- Bankruptcy Package & Forms
- How to Win Quiet Title & Foreclosure Defenses Training Videos
- Bonus Reports that include insider banking secrets
- And access to Member only products and services, including:
- Mortgage Fraud Audits
- Bloomberg Securitization Audits
- Mortgage Forensic Audits
- Robo-Signing Audits
- Chain of Title Investigations
- Custom Court Ready Legal Documents & Forms
- Trail Ready Evidence & Exhibits
- Expert Witness Affidavits
- Expert Witness Testimony
- Pro Se Legal Education & Training
- Pro Se Paralegal Support
- Dedicated Attorney Network
- Professional Mediation Services
- Private Investor Programs
- Credit Repair
- Income Opportunities
- And more!
TURNKEY QUIET TITLE & WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE LAWSUITS
As a member of FRAUD STOPPERS PMA we can provide you with a court ready, turnkey, quiet title or wrongful foreclosure lawsuit and a supporting evidence package that can save you time and money (and increase your odds of success) suing the banks for mortgage and foreclosure fraud, wrongful foreclosure, and quiet title.
What is a quiet title lawsuit? A quiet title is a lawsuit brought in a court having jurisdiction over property disputes, in order to establish a party’s title to real property, or personal property having a title, of against anyone and everyone, and thus “quiet” any challenges or claims to the title.
If your loan was part of a table funded securitized transaction then you have a broken chain of title, and your property is basically “unsecured”, just like an unsecured credit card debt. And if that’s the case than a quiet title lawsuit is the action for you! Our quiet title action seeks monetary damages for fraud and clear and free title to your home.
The Quiet Title Lawsuit Package:
- Court Ready Complaint (Petition for Damages)
- Bloomberg Securitization Audit
- Application for Temporary Restraining Order
- Lis Pendens
- Signed and Notarized Expert Witness Affidavit
- How to Win Quiet Title Videos
- FRAUD STOPPERS PMA Membership Included
The Bloomberg Securitization Audit includes:
- Time Stamped Bloomberg Screenshot[s] verifying the Trust Vehicle associated with your specific loan
- Pooling & Servicing Agreement (Trial Ready Material Evidence of Securitization)
- Complete Mortgage Fraud and Robo-Signing Check
- Credit Default Swap Analysis
- A Full Chain of Title Analysis of all the ASSIGNMENTS & TRANSFERS of your mortgage loan contract
- Signed and Notarized EXPERT WITNESS AFFIDAVIT from one of the top experts in the entire country, who is available to provide expert witness testimony at trail.
The Court Ready Turnkey Quiet Title Complaint includes:
- A Full Petition for Damages listing 12-15 Different Causes of Action based on the findings from your securitization audit report; including: Fraud in the Inducement; Fraud in the Concealment; Declaratory Relief; Emotional Distress; Lack of Standing to Foreclose and/or Wrongful Foreclose; Slander of Title; Rescission of Mortgage Loan Contract; and Quiet Title.
- An Application for a Temporary Restraining Order (to STOP A SALE – if one is imminent)
- A Lis Pendens – to Cloud the Marketability of Title.
The How to Win Quiet Title DVDs cover:
- How to Win Quiet Title
- How to Cancel Secured and Unsecured Debts through Strategic Litigation
- Achieving Principle Reductions by Creating Leverage
- Mortgage Securitization
- Contract Litigation and UCC
- Advanced Foreclosure Techniques
- And MUCH, MUCH, MORE
MAKE MONEY HELPING OTHERS
FRAUD STOPPERS PRIVATE MEMBERS ASSOCIATION (PMA) has a referral affiliate program that can pay you for helping other people fight mortgage and foreclosure fraud and learn how to fight for the legal remedy they deserve! In addition to FRAUD STOPPERS’ referral affiliate program you can also earn extra money helping others for:
- Get paid referring people to attorneys
- Get paid promoting the How to Win in Court program
- Get paid referring people for credit repair
- Get paid referring people for FRAUD STOPPERS programs
All of FRAUD STOPPERS PMA products and services are commissionable and you can make money helping others by referring them to these products and services.
To make money simply refer someone to us for help. When a sale is made, you get paid. It’s as easy as that!
FRAUD STOPPERS PMA is constantly striving to improve our business and the services we offer and promote.
FRAUD STOPPERS PMA is dedicated to helping the American People learn how to stand up and fight for their legal rights, due process, and their God given freedoms that are recognized and protected by the United States Constitution and the State Constitutions.
The FRAUD STOPPERS Private Members Association main objective is to maintain and improve the civil rights, constitutional guarantees and political freedom for every member and citizen of the United States of America.
We believe that the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America guarantees our members free speech, petition, assembly, and the right to gather together for the lawful purpose of advising and helping one another in asserting our rights under the Federal and State Constitutions and Statutes.
The FRAUD STOPPERS PMA declares that we are exercising our right of “freedom of association” as guaranteed by the 1st and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution and equivalent provisions of the various State Constitutions. This means that our association activities are restricted to the private domain only.
Our purpose as members is to educate and assist members in solving their legal concerns and problems as a preventative measure or as a solution to a present situation or condition through research, providing information and education, or directing the member to the proper resources. You can make money with:
- Attorney Referral Program
- Credit Repair Program
- Legal Education Program
- Mortgage Fraud & Foreclosure Defense Programs
Potential Income Opportunities:
- Credit Repair. 1 sale a day = $27,375 a year
- How to Win in Court program. 1 sale a day = $45,000 a year
- 1 sale a day could earn you = $65,700 a year
- Joint Venture Wrongful Foreclosure Program. 1 sale a day could earn you = $250,000 a year or MORE!
WINNING LAWSUITS & FREE HOUSES
Wells Fargo Quiet Title, Wrongful Foreclosure, Punitive Damages Lawsuit. Wells Fargo Quiet Title, Wrongful Foreclosure, Punitive Damages Lawsuit DAVID and CRYSTAL HOLM V. Wells Fargo Results in $2,959,123.00 in financial damages to homeowners and Quite Title to their property.
Based upon the record, the Court finds this sum to be fair and reasonable and supported by the evidence adduced at trial. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED that judgment is entered for punitive damages in favor of Plaintiffs David and Crystal Holm, husband and wife, and against Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. in the amount of TWO MILLION, NINE HUNDRED FIFTY-NINE THOUSAND, ONE HUNDRED TWENTY-THREE DOLLARS ($2,959,123.00).
NOW, THEREFORE, this matter having been tried before the Court, commencing on the 14th day of January, 2015, and, further, the Court having taken this matter under advisement upon its submission on the 16th day of January, 20] S, and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs appeared in person and by and through counsel, Gregory Leyh, and Defendants appeared by and through counsel, Martin Blanchard, Janet McKillip, and Andrew Jones, and WHEREAS, Plaintiffs having dismissed Count III, the Court finds on Count II and Count 1 as follows:
Plaintiffs Crystal G. Holm and David E. Holm were, at all times relevant to this proceeding, husband and wife residing in Clinton County, Missouri. Further, Plaintiffs were, until the foreclosure sale at issue, owners of real property situate in Clinton County, Missouri, commonly known as 3800 Timberlake Drive, Holt, Missouri, more particularly described as follows: LOT SIXTEEN (16) IN WOODRAIL, A SUBDIVISION IN CLINTON COUNTY, MISSOURI, ACCORDING TO THE RECORDED PLAT THEREOF
In 2008, a dispute arose as to Plaintiffs’ debt on the property. The property also sustained Substantial damage from a storm and the application of insurance proceeds was at issue. Plaintiffs had numerous communications (both verbal and written) with various Representatives of Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as Wells Fargo), and various representatives of Kozeny & McCubbin, L.C. (legal counsel for both Defendants in this proceeding and hereinafter referred to as Kozeny & McCubbin).
Plaintiffs were still seeking to resolve the disputed debt issues when Kozeny and McCubbin, acting, as Successor Trustee, and/or as legal counsel for the Successor Trustee, and/or as legal counsel for Defendant Wells Fargo, commenced foreclosure proceedings against Plaintiffs relating to the above-referenced property. Undisputed evidence reveals Plaintiffs family received a dollar amount to stop the foreclosure from Kozeny & McCubbin and Defendant Wells Fargo. Plaintiffs procured the necessary funds per the agreement.
Regardless, on August 15, 2008, Kozeny & McCubbin proceeded to foreclosure, selling the property to Defendant Federal Horne Loan Mortgage Corporation (hereinafter referred to as Freddie Mac) for the sum of $141,792.30. Plaintiffs’ efforts to set aside the foreclosure and/or reinstate the Joan were in vain. Ultimately, Freddie Mac filed an action in Unlawful Detainer (14CN-CV00501), currently pending against Plaintiffs, and Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit. The Court will first address Plaintiffs’ claim for quiet title relief set forth in Count II
Uncontroverted evidence at trial establishes Plaintiffs possessed title to the subject property until the date of the foreclosure sale. Prior to the sale, June 26, 2008, the “Foreclosure Department” of Kozeny & McCubbin sent a letter to Plaintiffs “in response to your correspondence disputing the validity of the debt” on the subject property. (It is unclear to the Court whether Kozeny & McCubbin issued the letter in their capacity as Successor Trustees, Attorneys for Successor Trustees, Attorneys for Wells Fargo, or in some other capacity.) The correspondence indicated they were providing Plaintiffs with “1. A copy of the deed of trust, and 2. A copy of the note” to “verify the debt which is owed.”
The promissory note (included in Plaintiffs’ Exhibit 26) was a promise to pay the original lender, Commercial Federal Mortgage Corp., and contained no endorsements, either in blank or to a specific party. The undisputed facts are neither Wells Fargo nor Freddie Mac had the right to enforce the note rendering the foreclosure sale void. In Williams v. Kimes, 996 S.W. 2nd 43, 4S (Mo. 1999), the Missouri Supreme Court indicated “no title is conveyed through the sale” when a party who lacks a right to enforce the note proceeds with foreclosure sale. Based upon the evidence, the Court finds neither Wells Fargo nor Freddie Mac had the right to enforce the unendorsed note incorrectly described by Kozeny & McCubbin as evidence to “verify the debt which is owed.” This Court finds Freddie Mac did not obtain title to the instant property through the foreclosure sale and title to the instant property should be quieted in the name of Plaintiffs.
In Count II Plaintiffs seek both compensatory and punitive damages for wrongful foreclosure of their property by Defendant Wells Fargo. Based upon the facts presented at trial, including, but not limited to, the facts set forth herein, the Court finds the foreclosure sale of the subject property on August 15, 2008, was wrongful.
The uncontroverted evidence is that on August 15, 2008, Freddie Mac paid $141,762.30 to purchase Plaintiffs’ property. Due to the actions of Defendant Wells Fargo, Plaintiffs have spent the last six and one-half years having in limbo. This Court is acutely aware of a pending unlawful detainer suit against David and Crystal Holm (Clinton County Case No, 14CNCVOOSO 1). An unlawful detainer case was initially filed ~y Freddie Mac against David and Crystal Holm on September 8, 2008, less than one month following the foreclosure sale (Clinton County Case No. 08CN-CV00729). Mr. and Mrs. Holm have been under the threat of eviction for well over six years. Upkeep and maintenance are constants when it comes to property.
It would be ludicrous to spend large sums of money to maintain a home titled to Freddie Mac and to which Plaintiffs might never regain title. Plaintiff David Holm testified that the current value of the property is $52,000. Mr. Holm’s testimony was uncontroverted. The difference in value is $89,762.30, which constitutes reasonable lost value to Plaintiffs· property. In addition, Plaintiffs testified they made repairs in the amount of $6,150 to the property to prevent even greater deterioration or diminution in value.
Mr. Holm made the repairs himself and paid for the 11ecessary materials. The cost of past home repairs to prevent additiona1 loss of the value of his home was $6,150. Exhibit 40 was received as additional evidence of the cost of past home repairs. Crystal Holm testified to her role in preparing Exhibit 40 and to the accuracy of the costs identified.
The Court finds Plaintiffs sustained actual damages as set forth herein above in the amount of NINETY-FIVE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED TWELVE DOLLARS AND THIRTY CENTS ($95,912.30).
The evidence further established Plaintiffs suffered considerable emotional distress and mental and physical anxiety attributable to, or as a direct result of, Defendant Wells Fargo’s actions. Plaintiff David Holm suffered panic attacks, heart problems requiring a heart monitor, high blood pressure, and daily anxiety due to the circumstances relating to the wrongful foreclosure. Plaintiff Crystal Holm testified regarding her “fear” of losing her family’s, home, and the impact of such a loss on her 12-year-old daughter, Liberty, and family. Mrs., Holm recounted her loss of optimism regarding a property that she hoped would be populated by horses and other animals. Both Plaintiffs testified about the substantial stress on their marriage resulting from the Defendants’ predatory and extreme and outrageous conduct.
Based upon the uncontroverted facts presented at trial, and including, but not limited to, the facts set forth herein above, the Court finds Plaintiffs are entitled to damages for emotional distress against Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. in the amount of TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($200, 000, 00), Based upon the record, the Court finds this sum to be fair and reasonable and Supported by the evidence adduced at trial.
The evidence established that Wells Fargo intentionally promised a reinstatement to Plaintiffs and told David Holm that no foreclosure sale would take place if he accepted the reinstatement. MI. Holm immediately accepted the offer, but Wells Fargo deliberately ignored the reinstatement deal and, in an egregious and deceitful manner, intentionally foreclosed on David and Crystal Holm’s family home. Through its agent Kozeny & McCubbin, Wells Fargo received a facsimile copy of Plaintiffs’ reinstatement check on the date of the foreclosure sale. Kozeny & McCubbin received the physical reinstatement check on August 16, 2008.
Plaintiffs fully and completely complied with the instructions provided by Wells Fargo and Kozeny & McCubbin regarding payment of the reinstatement check. Defendant Freddie Mac’s representative, Dean Meyer, testified that there is nothing in the Freddie Mac servicing guide stating that a reinstatement check must be received before the foreclosure sale. This is particularly true when the servicer and trustee make explicit promises to a borrower that they will not foreclose. Notwithstanding these promises, contracts, and commitments to Plaintiffs, Wells Fargo refused to stop the foreclosure. Further, Wells Fargo refused to cash the reinstatement check and reinstate Plaintiffs’ loan. The Court finds Defendant Wells Fargo’s attitude toward Plaintiffs unfathomable. The incredible effort made by Plaintiffs to keep the property they so clearly love should have been commended, not condemned. Wells Fargo’s decisions to renege on its promises and contract, and to deceive Plaintiffs with the pledge to cancel the foreclosure sale, were outrageous and reprehensible.
The Court finds Defendant Wells Fargo was deceitful in its dealings with David and Crystal Holm. Defendant Wells Fargo’s deceptive and intentional conduct displayed a complete and total disregard for the rights of David and Crystal Holm. Dean Meyer testified Freddie Mac considered reinstatement of the Holm note to be the most desirable of all possible outcomes. Freddie Mac’s servicing guide champions reinstatement and requires that servicers comply with its guidelines. Freddie Mac demands 111 at its servicers must go “the extra mile” to obtain a reinstatement whenever possible. Defendant Wells Fargo could easily have kept its word and reinstated the loan. Instead, Wells Fargo and its agents expended immeasurable, if not incomprehensible, time and effort to avert reinstatement.
The result of Wells Fargo’s egregious conduct was to impose approximately six and one-half years of uncertainty, lost optimism, emotional distress, and paralysis on Plaintiffs’ family. The evidence established that Wells Fargo’s intentional choice to foreclose arose from its own financial incentives. Dr, Kurt Krueger testified that Wells Fargo had financial incentives to seek reimbursement of its fees at a foreclosure sale. This economic motivation collided with the well-being of David and Crystal Holm and was clearly contrary to the interests of Freddie Mac.
In other words, in this case, a powerful financial company exerted its will over a financially distressed family in Clinton County, Missouri. The result is predictable. Plaintiffs were severely damaged; Wells Fargo took its money and moved on, with complete disregard to the human damage left in its wake, Defendant Wells Fargo is an experienced servicer of home loans. Wells Fargo knew that its decision to foreclose after reinstatement was accepted would inflict a devastating injury on the Holm family. Wells Fargo’s actions were, knowing, intentional, and injurious.
Defendant Wells Fargo operated from a position of superiority provided by its enormous wealth. Wells Fargo’s decision took advantage of an obviously financially vulnerable family, and there is no evidence of remorse for the harm caused to David and Crystal Holm. In fact, the Court recalls the lack of remorse and humanity illustrated by Wells Fargo’s corporate representative who testified, “I’m not here as a human being. I’m here as a representative of Wells Fargo.”
Based upon the facts presented at trial, and including, but not limited to, the facts set forth herein above, the Court finds Plaintiffs are entitled to punitive damages against Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., in the amount of TWO MILLION NINE HUNDRED FIFTY- NINE THOUSAND ONE HUNDRED TWENTY· THREE DOLLARS ($2,959,123.00).
Based upon the record, the Court finds this sum to be fair and reasonable and supported by clear and convincing evidence adduced at trial. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED that judgment is entered for damages in favor of Plaintiffs David and Crystal Holm, husband and wife, and against Defendant Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., in the amount of TWO HUNDRED NINETY, FIVE THOUSAND NINE HUNDRED TWELVE DOLLARS AND THIRTY CENTS ($295,912.30).
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED ADJUDGED AND DECREED that judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiffs David and Crystal Holm, husband and wife, and against Defendant Federal Home Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) on the claim for quiet title relief. Title to the property is quieted in the name of Plaintiffs David and Crystal Holm, husband and wife, who are hereby vested with fee simple title in and to the property commonly known as 3800 Timberlake Dr., Holt, Missouri 64048.
You can see more winning quiet title lawsuits and wrongful foreclosure lawsuits, and info on free houses, by clicking this red button.
For information on foreclosure defense call us at 573-292-1280. We offer litigation support, admissible evidence, expert witness testimony, education, training, and support in all 50 states to attorneys and pro se homeowners.
Feel free to connect with us . . .
Address: Birch Tree MO 65438 Phone: 573-292-1280 Email: Info@FraudStoppers.org
DISCLOSURE: NOTICE OF Copyright © 2017 FRAUD STOPPERS, FRAUD STOPPERS PMA. THIS SITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE MISCONSTRUED AS LEGAL ADVICE. Legal Information is NOT Legal Advice: This site provides “information” that is only designed to help users safely cope with their own general legal needs. Legal information is NOT the same as legal advice — the application of law to an individual’s specific circumstances. FRAUD STOPPERS is a National Private Members Association (PMA). PLEASE TAKE NOTICE OF THE FOLLOWING MARS Disclosure[s] 12 C.F.R. 1015.: (1) FRAUD STOPPERS PMA is NOT Affiliated with any Government Agency or Any Bank Lender; (2) Even if YOU Accept any of FRAUD STOPPERS PMA Products or Services Your Lender May Choose to NOT Change Your Loan. FRAUD STOPPERS products and services are only available to Active Members of the FRAUD STOPPERS PRIVATE MEMBERS ASSOCIATION. To join FRAUD STOPPERS PMA click here: https://www.fraudstoppers.org/members-only/