Category Archives: BREAKING NEWS

FDCPA CHALLENGED IN NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURES: U.S. SUPREME COURT TESTIMONY

(BREAKING NEWS) —

Here’s a rare treat … oral transcripts from Dennis Obduskey v. McCarthy & Holthus, LLP:

obduskey v mccarthy & holthus llp, scotus no 17-1307_oral transcripts of supreme court proceedings

(OP-ED) —

We’ve been waiting on the arguments here, because how the FDCPA is interpreted when it comes to foreclosures in non-judicial (Deed of Trust) states is at issue and has been in conflict among the federal circuits as to whether the enforcement of a security instrument (the actual deed of trust) constitutes the “collection of a debt”.  The 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals (where the case originated) says enforcement of a security instrument is not a violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act because it does not constitute debt collection.

Part of the problem here, is that it is and it isn’t (enforcement of a collection of debt) but an enforcement by the Trustee to sell property which is collateral for a debt (the note).  McCarthy & Holthus LLP is a known law firm that is part of a nationwide network that foreclosures on property wherein the borrower is claimed to be in default because of non-payment on the actual obligation (the Note).

Other courts have narrowly interpreted the matter in both ways.  This is where the conflict has occurred and this is why SCOTUS is hearing the matter.  If the Trustee is only attempting to satisfy the Lender’s need to recover the collateral that was pledged and does nothing more than use the contractual obligation of publication and sale to satisfy the terms of the security instrument (deed of trust) … that’s one thing.  The second the Trustee steps over the line and retains a law firm to enforce the terms of the security instrument and demand “payment” of a “sum certain”, THEN the attempt to collect a debt IS IN FACT, where misrepresentations occur, which would constitute a violation of the FDCPA!  My non-lawyer wisdom tells me to let YOU be the judge here!

If the law firm has all of its ducks in a row, that’s one thing.  But in this case, the argument tends to indicate it didn’t, which is why Dennis Obduskey filed suit.   This case represents one of the biggest challenges to non-judicial foreclosures in the United States; thus, this is worth the read if you are contemplating such an action.  Enjoy!

P.S.: The same amount of federal and state conflict has occurred with the MERS® System and the way the courts have treated it.  Why SCOTUS won’t hear those relative arguments may change.  For now, that issue is at a standstill.

8 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

ENTER 2019 AND THE NEW MERS!

(BREAKING NEWS – OP-ED) —

FYI, NOT for use as legal advice … but for the added benefits of research!

ICE OWNS MERSCORP … and things have changed! 

If you haven’t been paying attention to the “new and improved MERS”, you should be.  As of October of last year, Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (“ICE”; the same bunch that owns the New York Stock Exchange) took over MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.

Two new corporate shills appear to be heading up the parent (MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.).  I got this from the “new and improved MERSinc” website:

How ironic?  The “Goone” squad!  (I know you’re trying to hold back the laughter, but this is serious folks!)

Noticeably missing from the MERSINC.org website is the “Member Search” tool.   Now ICE has made it impossible and further obfuscates WHO is participating as a “user/subscriber of the MERS® System!  Thus, anyone wanting to do research on a MERS-originated mortgage or deed of trust is going to have to ask for their closing documents PRIOR TO signing them.  Otherwise, those who are ignorant of history are doomed to repeat it because THE GOONE SQUAD now controls all of the information in the MERS System!

It also appears that since Goone is connected to the DTCC, he now might have access to every credit transaction conducted throughout the United States!

You can still search for the alleged “Servicer” on the MERS® System website; however, the users of the system are expected to continue to put the same malarkey on the “Investor” portion of the site when you go to access that information, vis a vis entering your personal identifying information, namely, your last name and your social security number.

Let’s be clear one more time … your social security number is actually NOT your number.  It was assigned to you by the Social Security Administration when you volunteered to be in the social in-security program.

My wisdom for 2019 … AVOID MERS MORTGAGES LIKE THE PLAGUE!

Any mortgages or deeds of trust you intend to execute from now on probably should be through the following entities:

(1) credit unions that are NOT user/subscribers to the MERS® System; and

(2) owner financing, or in the alternative, hard money lending, designed to purchase within the short term.

You have every right to walk away from the closing table and not have your property encumbered by “MERS” paper.  You should also do a chain of title search on anything you intend on purchasing because you never know what unknown (mesne) assignees might be lurking in the shadows, just waiting for that inopportune moment to foreclose on you!

My further wisdom for 2019 … TAX DEEDS!

Every state has a system for purchasing tax deeds. Investigate these in the alternative!  You’re helping the county pay its bills, in addition to getting yourself a great deal!

In Florida, for example, you can buy tax deeds at auction for less than assessed value.  In Florida, for example, when you buy a tax deed and your tax deed is recorded, possession is immediate!  You get to own the land (or a single lot; sometimes you can get acreage) outright; however, first investigate to make sure you can put a manufactured home or site built home of smaller proportions (if you’re in the scale-down mode) on such a lot.  Many areas have deed restrictions.  Don’t forget, you still need to quiet the title to the property, but on tax deeds, provided you don’t have to serve a foreign investor or person outside of the U.S., most QT actions take 60-90 days to complete and shouldn’t cost you an arm and a leg.

Whatever “state” of the union you’re in, the county maintains the #1 position for liens, based on payment of property taxes.  The ways of the allodial title have disappeared, despite what you’ve heard from some well-meaning Patriots that claim you can restore a land patent to its original state.  There is an interesting comment from Washington State I found to back that up:

(NOTE: Click on the image to enlarge it to make it easier to read!)

Anyone trying this crap may find themselves on the receiving end of criminal charges because filing false documents into the land records is a felony in almost all 50 states and is punishable under both civil and criminal aspects.  You cannot evade property taxes anywhere.  This is why I like buying tax deeds for less than assessed value … the annual taxes on them is cheap and buying agricultural land (if you can find it) is even better!  It’s a great way to “start over” with less money, especially if you’re reeling from the effects of a foreclosure and are opting NOT TO DEFEND, but rather to move on.  Just make sure that if you’re buying a lot to build on, have a plan to follow through on that quickly.  Don’t buy raw land just for the sake of having a nest egg because you will continue to pay annual property taxes on that land in the future whether you live on that land or not.  Now that industrial hemp is being legalized, build your home out of hemp (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mfQbXuTzQQU) like these folks did in Asheville, North Carolina!

I’ve gotten past the point of asking people to simply deed their properties (that they’re about to be foreclosed on) over to me so I can litigate them in court.  If people were that “entitled” in the first place to make bad decisions to buy property using MERS-related securitization, thus screwing up their title, why would I want that headache?  Analyze every deal before engaging it!

MERS generally is never found on the titles to vacant lots!  That’s another plus for buying tax deeds on vacant land you intend on quickly building on.  Being mortgage free is a blessing in this day and age and I can only wish the best for my readers, that they can enjoy the freedom of not owing a bank or a monthly payment to a landlord, if not in 2019, then at some point in the near future.  That might be a great New Year’s resolution to make!  Why become part of the Nation of Renters if you don’t have to?

 

3 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

THE SYSTEM OF THINGS COMES HOME TO ROOST IN OREGON!

(BREAKING NEWS – OP-ED) —  The author of this post is a consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosure matters and issues related to the system of “things”. This isn’t legal advice.  It’s the system’s way of telling you something’s wrong. 

PORTLAND, OREGON … Another group of attorneys, accompanied by a non-profit Oregon civil liberties group (made up of lawyers) has decided that the Oregon Bar has violated their civil rights and wants a federal court to stop the Oregon State Bar (a Public Corporation) from mandating that attorneys HAVE TO join their little “club” in order to practice law.

As I explained previously in GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 8, two Oregon attorneys filed a challenge to the Oregon State Bar’s public statement containing political views the two didn’t agree with nor subscribe to as part of the dues they pay the Oregon State Bar, claiming their civil rights have been violated.

Instead of simply suing the Oregon State Bar, Daniel Crowe, Lawrence Peterson and the Oregon Civil Liberties Attorneys have filed civil rights claims against the Bar’s Board of Governors, its President, its President-elect, its CEO, its Director of Finance and Operations and its General Counsel, claiming they all had a hand in the violation of their freedom of speech, freedom of association and for damages caused by charging them attorney fees to belong to what we in the mainstream like to call “the good ‘ol boy club”.

It stands to reason that every State of the Union has a Bar Association, which regulates the professional behaviors of counsel that practice law within its jurisdiction and to protect the public from unscrupulous behavior caused by them or the people who work for them who are non-lawyers.  These same bar associations also go after non-lawyers who hold themselves out as if they were lawyers in order to collect fees for writing pleadings and advertising their services at a discount, hoping to gain an income, which in effect, deprives lawyers of their income.  It’s what they called the unauthorized practice of law.

Even the U.S. Supreme Court has gotten into the act, its citations abound, as noted within the pleadings, which you can read here:

Crowe et al v Oregon State Bar et al, U.S. D. Ore No 3-18-cv-02139 (Dec 13, 2018)

For those of you who need some background, here is the original suit originally filed, that contains the actual political speech as an attached exhibit:

Gruber, Runnels v Oregon State Bar, US D. Ore No 3-18-cv-1591 (Aug 29, 2018)

It also stands to reason that every other major profession that operates within each state (insurance salesmen, credit service organizations, hair stylists, architects, engineers, etc.) also be regulated to prevent public harm, which an argument has also been made that this licensing entity should include lawyers (in other words, when we have the State doing it, why should we even have a bar in the first place?) under its governing umbrella.

Why am I not surprised that political advocacy-based litigation was prompted when the Oregon State Bar decided to publicly post a statement containing political undertones shortly after the “push back” occurred in downtown Portland?   This has brought “the system of things” to its opposite extreme … challenging the constitutionality of the “bar association” altogether using the Oregon State Bar as a poster child, specifically citing the April 2018 Bar Bulletin, which included two statements on alleged “white nationalism”, one of which specifically criticized President Donald Trump, attached as an exhibit to the pleadings.

I think we can all agree that the two-party system of things we have currently in place in America has screwed us all in one way, shape or form.  Each one of you have a bone to pick with the way things operate in America, right?  We all want America to be a better place, but instead, thanks to politics of all shapes and sizes, all of our civil liberties have been trampled on … and we sit idly by doing nothing while both sides promulgate their agendas upon us while wasting our tax dollars.  So it’s not just the Bar that’s in play here, it’s our whole system of things.

If we take away the Bar’s right to discipline its own membership, then how can we stop the bank’s attorneys from lying to judges and screwing all of us over in courts all across America?  How then can we stop law firms from participating in the creation and execution of documents that are recorded in our land records, particularly assignments of mortgage and deed of trust, that create standing for plaintiffs who have no enforcement rights to notes and mortgages, from continuing to come into court and illicitly rape Americans of their wealth with no consequence to them or the judges with their agendas that give them what they want (your homes)?

To some of you, this may be nothing more than airing dirty laundry before the American public in federal court; however, this is where you go when you want to go after a State Corporation, because the “state” will circle its wagons when attacked … and you’ll get nowhere … which is why we have State Tort Claims Acts.  While this suit is not posited as such, you get my drift.

While this is a blatant challenge to the State Bar’s right to mandate that attorneys belong to it so that if they “step outta line, the men come and take you away” (to quote Buffalo Springfield) … remember the chorus to that song?  It just got replayed in your mind … I see this thing settling out of court with the Bar agreeing never to do that again.  However, what if there is retribution against all the attorneys who brought these actions?  What then?  Where does it end?  Why shouldn’t every State Bar across the land be prevented from engaging in political speech?

Politics has become embedded within our entire judicial system!  If it wasn’t, we wouldn’t have judges with “agendas” that refuse to hear the truth about “whether we made a mortgage payment or not” or “Are you in default?” (as if we’re supposed to know what the term default means).  Half of you out there think that the term default means you didn’t make your mortgage payment, but as the saying goes, “That ain’t necessarily so!”  That WORD has political undertones in today’s foreclosure courts because it gives judges impetus to throw it around like confetti and use it to kick people to the curb with no proof that a default actually occurred … all the judge has to do is to get the borrower to admit he didn’t make his mortgage payment … the WHY doesn’t matter after that.   And the judge just stepped in and did the bank’s attorney a big favor by helping him win his case!  It’s no wonder that in the criminal realm, 92% of all convictions come out of the mouth of the accused!

And here I thought that by disciplining your children, teaching them right from wrong, could be considered “practicing law”.  Now, the system hangs you out to dry for child abuse for even swatting your kid on the behind in public for inappropriate behavior.

This is where conservatism and liberalism have ruined America.

 

 

 

 

6 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

Clouded Titles Author Dave Krieger on WKDW-FM Friday Night!

Tune in to City Spotlight – Special Edition this Friday night (and every Friday night) at 6 P.M. (Eastern time) and hear the latest news on legal and financial issues, as well as local area concerns.  Click this link:  CITY SPOTLIGHT and then click LISTEN NOW to gain internet access to the program!

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS

UPDATE: PRO-BANK 5TH U.S. CIRCUIT APPELATES TAKE DOWN ANOTHER HOMEOWNER … MAYBE?

(BREAKING NEWS — OP-ED) —  The author of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys in foreclosure matters and issues involving “the system of things”.  None of what you’re reading in this post should be construed as legal advice nor posited to guarantee a legal outcome.  

UPDATE: Now that the legal community has had somewhat of a chance to review the previously discussed Fifth U.S. Circuit ruling (in THIS case), let’s see what one law firm has to say:  5th Circuit Holds Bankruptcy Stay Tolls Statute of Limitations | Weiner Brodsky Kider PC – JDSupra

This will certainly give you an idea of how the other side thinks.

_______________________________________________________

As promised, I bring you the latest relevant case from the Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the Big Easy.  But wait … it wasn’t a “big easy” for the borrower, whose case I worked on long ago (in doing a chain of title assessment for) and whose assignments of deed of trust I use in my chain of title workshops to show “document manufacturing gone wrong”.  Wilshire Credit Corporation, used by Countrywide as one of its servicers,  is to blame for that screw-up.

None of what you’re about to read in this ruling appears proper because no one ever attacked the assignments head on, even when it was suggested to do so. Remember, I can’t give legal advice and it’s sad when I have to read rulings like this, knowing what I know that should have been done, but wasn’t.

So … let’s read the ruling first, then we’ll analyze how the homeowner shot himself in the foot because he put his money where it shouldn’t have been put and didn’t put his money where it should have been put:

HSBC Bank USA NA v Crum, 5th App Cir No 17-11206 (Oct 17, 2018)

We’ll do a little analysis on the chain of title and show you what suspect document manufacturing looks like and my perspective on HOW it should have been challenged.  Is it because of attorney ignorance or just plain and simple frustration?

Let’s see how sharp you are in detecting WHAT went wrong here:

ASSIGNMENT NUMBER ONE                                                                                              

NOTE: Click on the assignment to see it in larger print and click the BACK tab on your computer screen to get back to the article.

I put this assignment FIRST for a reason … look at the time (in the upper, right-hand corner) as to WHEN the assignment was recorded … 11:04:32 a.m. on July 14, 2009.   I surmise that this document was manufactured by employees of the servicer, Wilshire Credit Corporation, to create standing for HSBC Bank USA NA as Trustee for MLMI (that’s Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors) Trust Series 2005-WMC1.  It should be clear to you that “WMC” in the REMIC series was a REMIC set up by WMC Mortgage Corporation, which was the alleged original lender.

The 5th Circuit has already ruled that it doesn’t matter if the original lender went bust BEFORE the documents were created.  How could they do that?   Corruption?  Maybe?   Maybe it was given the wrong information in the pleading.  Maybe?   The appellate court can only rule on the information it was provided and I don’t believe that any of this stuff I’m showing you here was properly vetted in discovery, was it?

Notice something else?   The signer executing this document (a known robosigner), claims to be an “Attorney-in-Fact” for MLMI Lending, Inc., however; as I will show you, she’s not acting as an attorney in fact for WMC Mortgage Corporation, is she?   There’s no written evidence of where the Limited Power of Attorney is recorded on this document, is there?

Also notice that Wilshire Credit Corporation (the mortgage loan servicer) prepared this document and after it was recorded, got it back through the U.S. Mail. This will be important to note for future discussion.

This recording was a 3-page document.  Page 2 contained the legal description.  Now … wait until you see Page 3!

What’s wrong with this picture?  These F**KTARDS can’t even do their job right, can they?   The executor of this document prepared this Allonge to show that the Depositor conveyed it into the REMIC on July 6, 2009.  If you look at the Trust’s 424(b)(5) Prospectus (shown below), the Cut-Off Date for assigning the note and mortgage to the REMIC was January 1, 2005, because (according to the IRS’s Start-up Date for the REMIC) the Closing Date of the REMIC was January 27, 2005.  This Allonge was done over 4-1/2 years later … in violation of the REMIC’s own regulations!  Besides, what do $10/hour employees of Wilshire Credit Corporation know anyway, right?   Who investigated this?  I did!  I told the Borrower long ago what happened to his chain of title.  His attorney apparently didn’t care enough to depose anyone.

Here’s what wrong with this picture:

First, you attach an “Allonge” to the promissory note, NOT an assignment!

Second, the executor of the document, a robosigner-employee of the servicer, claiming to be an attorney-in-fact for MLMI Lending, Inc., not WMC Mortgage Corporation, executed this Allonge less than a WEEK PRIOR TO the actual recording of this assignment!   How convenient is that, considering she is NOT the Lender.

Third, WMC Mortgage Corporation, owned by GE, was closed in 2007 due to the subprime mortgage collapse.  So here we have a servicer’s employee, two years later, claiming she has “attorney-in-fact” status, when most powers of attorney expire when the company GRANTING the LPOA ceases to do business!  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure this out!  AND …

Fourth, the signer of this document and Allonge is claiming she has power of attorney for MLMI Lending, Inc., right?  Would you please look at the above list of Principal Parties and tell me you see MLMI Lending Inc. anywhere in that document as a listed party to the equation?   So where is Treva Moreland’s authority as a $10/hour mortgage loan servicer’s employee attorney-in-fact status for a lender that closed up shop years earlier?  Oh, wait, the Pro-Bank 5th Circuit doesn’t give a shit, do they?   Or was it the Borrower or the Borrower’s attorney’s fault for not checking into this further?

But wait … it gets better!  (That’s an Al West sarcastic remark!) 

ASSIGNMENT NUMBER TWO

I put this assignment SECOND for a reason … look at the time (in the upper, right-hand corner) as to WHEN the assignment was recorded … 11:13:08 a.m. on July 14, 2009. This document was recorded SEVEN MINUTES AFTER THE FIRST ASSIGNMENT!  Again, I surmise that this document was manufactured by F**KTARD employees of the servicer, Wilshire Credit Corporation, to create standing for HSBC Bank USA NA as Trustee for MLMI (that’s Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors) Trust Series 2005-WMC1.  Notice the same Oregon notary (Justin M. Burns) appears on this assignment as well, claiming that on July 6, 2009, the same day as Treva Moreland, the signer of the first-recorded assignment claims to have attorney-in-fact status …

Here comes Melissa Tomlin (another $10/hour Wilshire Credit Corporation F**KTARD employee), claiming she’s an Assistant Secretary for “MERS” as Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. for then-defunct WMC Mortgage Corporation … AND … she’s assigning BOTH the Note and Mortgage to Merrill Lynch Mortgage Lending, Inc. from WMC Mortgage Corporation who (now-defunct) is a “valid Assistant Secretary” for MERS … WOW!  MERS’s resolutions must really be legally sound to be able to have servicer’s employees creating shit documents out of thin air using MERS as a nominee for a closed company … Hmmm … I wonder what agency relationship existed between MERS and WMC after GE closed WMC over two years earlier?

This assignment was also 3 pages in length and was prepared and mailed back to Wilshire Credit Corporation after it was recorded.  Page 2, like before, contains the legal description of the subject property.   And now … for the GRAND FINALE … let’s see what’s on Page 3, shall we? (I am chuckling at this juncture, see if you can figure out why):


Notice what’s on the last page?   AN INDORSEMENT STAMP to Merrill Lynch Mortgage Lending, Inc. by WMC Mortgage Corporation!   Again, I surmise the following:

First, endorsements belong on either the promissory note or the allonge to note (if the promissory note is full of endorsements and cannot accommodate any more of them) … NOT ON A RECORDED ASSIGNMENT!

Second, the executor of the document, a robosigner-employee of the servicer, claiming to be an Assistant Secretary for MERS as nominee for then-defunct WMC Mortgage Corporation, HAD KNOWLEDGE OF what she signed when she affixed her signature to the document (that the indorsement stamp was affixed to page 3 therein), or should have had knowledge of it, right?

Third, you’d think she’d have every opportunity, being an Officer of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (Assistant Secretary), by alleged resolution ONLY and not attorney-in-fact, that she’d have some smarts about stuff like this. Nope! Doesn’t appear that way, does it?  In fact, I’m not even sure that Melissa Tomlin (after doing several signature comparisons on assignments from around the country) actually was the party executing this document!

Fourth, remember, WMC Mortgage Corporation, owned by GE, was closed in 2007 due to the subprime mortgage collapse.  So here we have a servicer’s employee, two years later, claiming she has an agency relationship with MERS as an Assistant Secretary, when in fact she’s a Wilshire Credit Corporation employee (clearly, a misrepresentation of fact), when the company GRANTING the nominee status to MERS to create an alleged (unproven) agency relationship in the first place, is no longer business!

Fifth, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that when a company goes bust, agency relationships can be challenged!  I don’t ever see that happening in this case, do you?  (If you do, please correct me in the comments section of this post so everyone can see how uninformed I am!)

But wait … it gets better!  (That’s another Al West sarcastic remark!) 

No one knows how this happened … BUT … either the documents were improperly submitted wrong by Wilshire Credit Corporation when they mailed the packet to the Dallas County Clerk’s Office for recording in his Official Real Property Records … OR … the Clerk’s office juxtaposed the documents … SO … here’s what happened (you may have already figured this out … this is a fun example of a brain teaser for you researchers out there) to screw up the borrower’s chain of title with suspect documents (fact check these if you will):

(1) At the time BOTH assignments were executed, WMC Mortgage Corporation was no longer in business (not that the 5th U.S. Circuit really cares).

(2) MERS was used to cover up the chain of title, even though the agency relationship more than likely ended when WMC closed up shop (there was never a repudiation agreement against the MERSCORP executory contract ever filed in WMC’s bankruptcy, if it fact, it filed for such).

(3) In order for the facts to present themselves in proper order, the second assignment SHOULD HAVE BEEN recorded FIRST to reflect the transfer of the Note and Mortgage to MLMI Lending, Inc. from WMC, so MLMI Lending, Inc. could properly convey it into the REMIC Trust.

(4) But wait!  MLMI Lending, Inc. is nowhere to be found in the Prospectus for the REMIC under “Principal Parties”.  The originating lender was subprime mortgage lender WMC Mortgage Corporation.  True sale #1 would have been from WMC to the Seller, Merrill Lynch Mortgage Capital, Inc., an entirely separate corporation from Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Lending, Inc., right?  So True Sale #1 was F**KED UP!

(5) True Sale #2 should have been from Merrill Lynch Mortgage Capital Inc. to Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., the Depositor for the trust, who, under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement found in the Prospectus, signed under penalty of perjury under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, would have and should have completed True Sale #3 by transferring it into the REMIC itself, as the Issuer of the Certificates!

(6) All true sales had to be completed before the Cut-Off Date … so in fact we have a violation of the trust agreement and a misrepresentation in the Prospectus, if we are to believe what just happened here was factual.

(7) The misrepresentations contained within the Assignments themselves purport to have transferred everything (in order) from WMC to MLMI Lending, Inc. and from MLMI Lending, Inc. to the REMIC Trust; however, with them being recorded in reverse, it would have been impossible to represent this the other way around, so the entire chain of custody of the note is convoluted and so is the chain of title, creating suspect issues for discovery.

(8) Because MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.) cannot convey Notes because it doesn’t have an interest in the Notes (it only allows lenders to record them in the MERS® System database), then the entire claimed transfer by the servicer’s employee (and NOT the lender itself, who was by then defunct) was also misrepresentative in fact.

(9) Further, all of these misrepresentations appear to constitute violations of the Texas Penal Code and the fact the U.S. Mails were used could constitute felony mail fraud (two counts), which is a 95% slam dunk for the prosecution.  Thus, had “the system of things” played itself out the way it should have been played out, Treva Moreland, Melissa Tomlin and Justin Burns would all be doing time instead of going about their feeble lives doing whatever.

(10) Under “the system of things”, the attorneys for the bank relied on these assignments to steal Mr. Crum’s property and should be disbarred.  The judge in the state court could obviously NOT be held accountable for the fraud on his court, because he wasn’t made aware of it at the time the suit was filed and answered (the Texas Constitution requires all HELOC’s to be judicial challenges under Rule 736 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure).  If the judge was made aware, he could have lost his bond and have been removed from the bench and the headlines would have grabbed national attention!

(11) And now … for the piece d’resistance … the lawsuit filed by the alleged REMIC, for which it got a judgment against Mr. Crum, conveniently alleged that Mr. Crum was in default, when in fact, the REMIC’s own Prospectus required Wilshire Credit Corporation to make Mr. Crum’s payments on the home if he couldn’t make them … see here, see here:

Notice where is says (in Paragraph 2 of the foregoing paragraphs) that the Servicer (Wilshire) is obligated to make such advances with respect to delinquent payments of principal and interest on each Mortgage loan … how then, could Mr. Crum be in default?   If MLMI 2005-WMC1 was never aware of the default, which we know probably didn’t happen since the servicer was making all of the advance payments, then WHO actually was foreclosing on Mr. Crum?

(12) Wilshire Credit Corporation … using what I claim are false and misrepresentative documents!  But I’m not the expert witness here (but I have an attorney who is though).  I still see a mess in the constructive notice to the world of when the documents were juxtaposed.  Improperly recorded documents put the cart before the horse, didn’t they?  Can you see it spelled out now?

Any decent, well-informed, non-agenda’d judge should have been aware of all of this … but then again, they only review what’s put in front of them and what’s challenged and why.   You be the judge as to WHO failed WHO here and why.

I had all the facts in 2011.  Now they’ve come home to roost over seven years later … in a bad way!  I can definitely say discovery was sorely lacking here!

Join Dave Krieger and R. J. Malloy for another exciting segment of City Spotlight – Special Edition on WKDW-FM, 97.5 in North Port, Florida, this Friday night at 6:00 p.m. (Eastern) … the subject matter this week … blockchain, jurisdictional issues, societal breakdown and the latest from the ABA blogs!  To listen to the show, CLICK HERE!

 

 

 

 

 

11 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, Securitization Issues