Category Archives: OP-ED

BELATED CHRISTMAS PRESENT … WHEN WITNESSES DON’T HAVE PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE

(OP-ED) — The author of this post is hoping you are having a safe and peaceful holiday season … with an educational viewpoint as a belated gift … which has its own conclusions of law thrown in for good measure.  

Here’s an interesting take on an older 2019 case, which by the way was just recently “Shepardized” only to discover it’s still “standing” and hasn’t been reversed and it has to do with what a witness knows and is able to testify to versus what that same witness doesn’t know.  It’s a case out of Wisconsin (smile and say “Cheese!” Mr. Witness … you don’t know what you’re talking about and the court agrees with the homeowner)!

Wells Fargo Bank NA v Juza, Wisc App Ct Dist 3 No 2017AP1515 (June 25, 2019)

And of course, it’s not published!  If the system of things were to allow every homeowner-favored case to be published, we’d actually learn something about how cases are won, not how they’re lost.

We spend all our time trying to prove a negative.  Why not just dump that task on the witness?

From an analyst point of view, scroll down the foregoing PDF to the bottom of Page 7 (of 14) … where it says “DISCUSSION”.

Start reading at the second sentence … and when you get to the top o the second column of Page 8 (of 14), you will begin to see where Bank of America’s case begins to fall apart. The word ROBOSIGNER appears multiple times throughout this ruling.  It’s nothing that the Court’s don’t recognize or want to hear … because most judges will pooh-pooh these allegations all day long. However, the fact remains that if you can catch the witness in a bald-faced lie, it makes your appeal that much more palatable to the higher courts if you can show the witness could … in no way … have had personal knowledge of a lot of the facts:

  1. Who had actual possession of the note and mortgage at the time of the foreclosure?
  2. How did the robosigner in this instance contradict himself in his testimony?
  3. What evidence did the other side (coming against the homeowner) fail to produce or establish?
  4. How could the lack of knowledge be used to beat up the other side’s argument that the witness was there only to assist the Plaintiff Bank to commit fraud on the court?
  5. How does the other side “dilute” its arguments by asserting that proving fraud on the court requires more than just a witness’s committing perjury?
  6. How does the Plaintiff Bank misuse case law in trying to get a court to side with it?  (Another reason for research into each cited case!)
  7. Submitting a false affidavit to a court amounts to just the same as committing fraud on the court, right?

The Circuit Court dismissed the case with prejudice on one hand but dismissed the “judgment on the note” on the other hand, allowing the bank to have another “bite at the apple”.  We certainly can’t give the homeowner a free house, now can we?  Geez, I saw nothing in this case about filing a complaint against the law firm and the attorney of record with the state bar, did you?   The attorney must have had some knowledge about the ROBOSIGNER … or was the attorney just too arrogant to recognize he was possibly suborning perjury on the court?

So we end the matter on a 50-50 split decision … Wells Fargo’s appeal was frivolous and the homeowners get denied their motion for attorneys fees and costs (because … and probably due to the rationale of the court systems in this country … they get to stay in their home just a bit longer without having to pay for it).

Of course this opinion won’t be published.  Why would you even think that?  We might actually learn something from unpublished opinions, right?

Look at the bright side.  If they’re unpublished opinions, the other side won’t be so quick to study them.

Happy Holidays!

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED

THE HOA – INVESTOR DILEMMA: CONFLICT IN SOUTH CAROLINA

(BREAKING NEWS – OP-ED) — The author of this post includes the relative case opinion for your educational enjoyment. One does not have to be an attorney to read a court opinion and derive the same conclusions I did, even though they’re not legal advice. 

A lot of you have moved into areas that contain homeowners associations (hereinafter “HOAs”).  After living in one once, I’m no longer a big fan of them. This is largely due in part to the following rationale:

  1. There’s usually an area resident living near you that drives by your home every day and takes notes of “alleged violations” on your property (e.g., grass not mowed to that person’s specified desire; extra vehicle parked on the street; vehicle with signage on it visibly parked in the driveway; mailbox flag painted green when the specifications call for flags to be painted red; 5-gallon bucket of water (with water in it) sitting noticeably within eyeshot, which could draw mosquitoes; dead grass which should be replaced with decent sod (in their opinion); tree branches hanging too low over sidewalk; roof shingle torn away; clump of weeds growing visibly near the entrance to your driveway … and the list goes on and on of all the nitpicking that these “Gladys Kravitz’s” do on a regular basis);
  2. Making modifications to your home without contacting the HOA’s Architectural Control Committee FIRST and getting prior approval (or not) before doing the modifications; and the most notorious …
  3. Failing to timely pay HOA dues and assessments.

I hate it when people tell me I “can’t” do something to a property I’m responsible for occupying and maintaining, don’t you?

While the foregoing examples can be particularly annoying, the argument for having an HOA is that having community-based oversight protects property values in the neighborhood … except when the HOA decides to file liens against you and subsequently foreclose on the property in a manner that “shocks the conscience”.

Such was the case in South Carolina, where (in this case), the Hales, who had been faithfully paying on their existing mortgage regularly, inadvertently forgot to pay their $250 HOA dues and were foreclosed on by their HOA (Winrose).

Investors particularly like this kind of scenario because they can buy properties through HOA sales cheap.  The problem with all of this is that (if you were paying attention beforehand) the Hales had a mortgage and were current on it.

What part of reading the Covenants, Conditions & Restrictions (hereinafter “CC&Rs”) and By-Laws of the HOA do you not get?

Here’s a thought: Before moving into an area, do the following:

  1. Identify immediately upon inquiry whether the property is part of an HOA, COA (Condominium Owners Association) or POA (Property Owners Association) … or any kind of Planned Unit Development (PUD) BEFORE even deciding whether or not you want to live there;
  2. Identify what utility districts supply the property with water, sewer, electric, etc. (yes … these little buggers can posit real headaches for you as well); and
  3. Demand a copy of the CC&Rs (some of these can be quite lengthy … yes, you need to get them) and the HOA/COA/POA/PUD By-Laws … and read them from cover to cover.  You’ll notice one particular thing about these entities: they don’t have to notice lien holders, only property owners!

The disagreement came from the Chief Justice of the South Carolina Supreme Court, who appears to have sided similarly with recent Nevada and U.S. 9th Circuit opinions that HOAs may possess a super priority lien in certain cases; however, when it comes to fighting a homeowners’ claim that you unjustly enriched yourself (as an investor buying their property at an HOA foreclosure sale) for a pittance while they were stuck with the mortgage … well … that’s where the rubber meets the road (as it were) as you’ll see when you read this opinion:

Winrose HOA et al v Hale, Sup Ct SCar No 27934 (Dec 18, 2019)

I found this 11-page opinion interesting because of its apparent equitable conflicts. The case was reversed and remanded back to the appellate court because the Hales demonstrated that the buyer of their HOA lien (Regime) bought 38 other properties at HOA foreclosure sales and not once bothered to pay off the senior liens, which then turned around and foreclosed on the properties Regime bought for failure to pay the mortgages.  In other instances, Regime bought at least 15 properties where it quitclaimed back to the owners for a profit between $2,911 and $13,984 per property … WOW!  What a game of things, eh?  This is one way to make money as an investor, especially when the homeowners are actually paying on their mortgages.  The 38 properties were probably rented out, if Regime actually evicted the homeowners in favor of renters and Regime could have likely pocketed the earnings prior to foreclosure (if there was equity in the properties, could that not be construed as criminal equity skimming?); however those side mentions were not actually contained in the opinion.

Shitty investor behavior?  Perhaps.

If you read Part II of this opinion (starting at Page 5), you’ll see why judges have “equity hats”.  While many investors think of these as “Ass Hats” because in the minds of the investor, a sale is a sale is a sale is a sale.  However, the CC&Rs and the By-Laws clearly state (in nearly all instances I’ve seen) that the HOA is NOT required to notice the lien holder of a pending foreclosure sale!  Even though the mortgage (deed of trust) does state that the lender MAY, in an effort to protect its lien interest in a property, mostly contained in the mortgage’s Paragraph 9), pay the HOA dues to protect its lien interest, most don’t.  This is what has created the super priority liens cases in Nevada … and now apparently, due to inequitable concerns, in South Carolina.

The “Equity Hat” comes in (in this case) where the winning bid “shocks the conscience”.  It’s one thing if the investor were to do a chain of title assessment (COTA) on the property and discover bogus assignments for which it could later “knock out” the existing lender in lieu of paying the mortgage loan off.

However, that is NOT how this plays out.

The inequities in this instance went against the HOA and Regime:

  1. The Hales were minimally in arrears on their HOA dues, yet the HOA foreclosed on a $128,000 home in its eagerness to collect the outstanding $250! The greedy bastards!  Welcome to the world of homeowners associations!  The majority of them behave just like this!  Many at least give the homeowners notice (along with plenty of time) to make up the delinquency in order to avoid foreclosure.
  2. Regime, because it attempted to extort the astronomical sum of $35,000 from the Hales on a $3,000 bid it paid at the HOA foreclosure sale!  The greedy bastards! Welcome to the world of extortion by investor.  This is not unusual; however, since I’m an investor, I tend to look at things a bit more objectively.

Black letter law is what it is. Investors aren’t responsible for paying the senior lien if they acquire property at an HOA foreclosure sale.  Homeowners are responsible (according to their mortgage loan terms and conditions) for paying dues and assessments to prevent the lien holder from losing their first position claim to the property.  In this case, lesson learned.  The Supreme Court vacated the HOA sale and remanded the case back to the Special Master for further proceedings.  Equity is Equity folks.  What shocks my conscience even more is the absence of thought when it comes to buying property in an HOA, giving a third party control over how you live and charging you a fee to do it … and when you don’t pay the fee, they steal your property for a paltry sum just to make a point that they’re in control of your life!

Be that as it may … especially as we’re in the “holiday season” … the outcomes (the just desserts) are based on your honest objectives in investing in anything, whether it’s buying a property (in an HOA or not) or investing in others’ misfortunes. What goes around comes around.

Be that as it may … a homeowner living in an HOA has to be on the lookout for “shitty behavior” on the part of the HOA (including checking the legal description and comparing it to what’s really recorded in the land records … you might be surprised to find the HOA doesn’t have a claim of lien on you at all because the legal description was improper!) … and by not stepping into this trap in the first place by buying elsewhere, where HOA’s don’t rule your life.

I know … some people like having an axe held over their heads all the time to keep them in line.  They think they’re good citizens by living in an HOA community. Many of these HOAs have golf courses and other super amenities that cater to the current affluence out there … but … as the saying goes:  Ah, the times … they are a-changing!  These HOAs may find the younger mindsets of the millennials and their successors want nothing to do with them.

This is why I teach chain of title assessment classes … BTW … there’s one coming up soon … CLICK HERE for more info!  Caveat Emptor!

In my next post … I’m going to break loose into the politico of the discord that has infiltrated America … which goes to show that you can’t drain the swamp without something stinking!  Many of you are “preparing for uncertain times” … and rightly so … you should be!

 

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, INVESTOR END-GAME STRATEGIES, OP-ED, webinar, workshop

WHY IT PAYS TO CHECK THE WHOLE CHAIN OF TITLE!

(BREAKING NEWS – OP-ED) — The author of this post is providing the following case for your review to prove his point (not legal advice).  Take the educational value for what it is when you don’t do your due diligence! 

1601 Bay LLC et al v Wilmington Savings Fund Society FSB et al, 3D19-492 (Nov 20, 2019)

This is one of the reasons I decided to offer an online Chain Of Title Assessment (COTA) class in the near future, so you can take advantage of not having to travel distances to participate in (8) 2-hour sessions to learn how these assessments are conducted and utilized.  These are not for foreclosure defense use (as an exhibit) … only for case development.

We are still in the midst of a foreclosure crisis.  It’s all due to the blowback of issues like what’s been described in this case.  It’s not hard to understand.  If you don’t look at the entire chain of title (and don’t expect your title company to do this for you) as an investor or future homeowner, you deserve what you get.

I’m going to be brief about this because you’ve heard me “beat the drum” now for how many years?  Many of you have scoffed at my pontifications.  Some of you have taken it to heart.  The mega-banks are worthless when it comes to fair and honest dealing, yet consumers are still flocking to them for loans, which they are still securitizing.  Again, definition of insanity (as I discussed in my last post).

The upcoming workshop dates … February 1st, 8th, 15th, 22nd.  Times are Eastern (9 am – 1 pm).  For more details, see the Clouded Titles website.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, Securitization Issues, workshop

TEN YEARS LATER … HAS YOUR DEFINITION OF “INSANITY” CHANGED YET?

(OP-ED) — The author of this post posits these comments based on his own observations and none of this should be construed to be legal advice. For the record, the definition of “insanity” is … doing the same thing for the next 10 years you did the last 10 years expecting different results. 

Who would have ever thought that me breaking my foot would steer me down a path of moral concern, that is, America’s foreclosure crisis based on phony documents?

The Beginning of Insanity

It all began in mid-2007, when, quite by accident, I was surfing the county clerk’s website looking for details on my Texas property and discovered repetitive references to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter “MERS”).  I had no idea who MERS was until I started doing further research into this entity only to discover this electronic database had been around since at least 1999.  It didn’t even occur to me that MERS was a brainchild of the banks because at that time, there wasn’t much information out there because the lawsuits that have made the annals of American history were not made manifest yet.

I also had no idea that MERS and the banks were working hand in hand to further their “case wins” in courts by posturing MERS as some sort of legitimate “party” that had the right to foreclose on property.  I only discovered this in 2009 after I started doing serious research into security instruments and all of the accompanying documents that littered the land records across America in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008 and the previous redux of securitization, which finally reared its ugly head in a way that most Americans could understand.  It was at that time I started to develop what would later become the Chain of Title Assessment (COTA).  How the documents interrelated to each other became more important than the actual information contained within each document because a pattern of behavior became obvious which was worth doing more research on.  That pattern of behavior was recorded assignments being placed within the land records just prior to a foreclosure being commenced on any given piece of property in America.

By mid-2010, I had a specific pattern identified and was able to develop a COTA checklist based on that pattern of misbehavior.  The pattern was not just a making of the law firm or the trustees attempting to enforce security instruments.  It became obvious later on in the game that the law firms and trustees actually were doing the bidding of the mortgage loan servicers; however, that realization did not come until AFTER Clouded Titles had been published (in December of 2010).  It was not until mid-2012 that things began to surface that would lead me straight to identifying who was behind all of the chicanery that enveloped all 3,041 of our nation’s real property records.  At that point in time, I had already established a working relationship with several Texas Clerks and had lectured to their Clerks’ School, sponsored by the V.G. Young Institute for County Government.  Williamson County Clerk Nancy Rister and Williamson County government were the first to attack MERS and the servicers and third-party document mills head-on in a land record audit, which was formally released in January of 2013.

WILLIAMSON COUNTY REAL PROPERTY RECORDS AUDIT_January 29, 2013

Judging by MERS’s reaction to the audit, I knew we were onto something. MERS went out of its way to try to debunk the 179 pages of damning assertions that the mortgage loan servicers and their third-party document mills were the ones behind all of the false and misrepresentative statements we would soon come to identify in the hundreds of COTAs I would being conducting since Clouded Titles was released.  Reporters kept telling me that MERS claimed it did nothing wrong and my reply was, “Then why is everybody suing them?”

A Big Mistake

The chain of title assessment (COTA) has been referenced as a “chain of title analysis”; however, through whatever name you want to give it, the research that goes into a COTA makes it a report, an investigative piece if you will.  By the time that the mortgage loan servicers agreed with 49 states Attorneys’ General to stop production on fraudulent documents, word had spread not only to the legal community but also the public at large, that this chicanery was widespread. Foreclosure victims became outraged at the thought of being defrauded through the illicit use of the land records.  It was at about that time that the COTA hit the courts.  Reliance on a COTA in a court of law or of equity is a huge mistake as many have discovered.  Proof of that will be made manifest in this post.  By the time homeowners and their attorneys ran screaming into court about the “fraud” in the documents, MERS and the banks had already set case precedent that the contents of the documents could not be challenged because the borrowers were not “third party beneficiaries” to the assignments and therefore had no right to challenge.  In my opinion, this lame excuse of not benefitting from the assignment was a ploy to gain favor with the courts, whose judges went along with the argument because the homeowners’ attorneys had no comeback to the argument.  The big mistake however, was the misuse of the COTA and the laziness of homeowners’ counsel to conduct proper discovery.

Many litigants ran into court with their research and attempted to use it as “evidence” to prove their theories that they were defrauded by and through the use of “fraudulent documents” recorded in the public records. Once such case involving this posts’s author manifested itself in Texas on November 25, 2013, in the same year that the Williamson County Real Property Records Audit was released.  See the case below and pay attention to the references on Page 4, where this author’s name is mentioned:

Brown v BANA_Tex 5th App Dist No 05-12-01382-CV (Nov 25, 2013)

Quoting my name and my book and making references to it is not PROOF as the Appellant soon learned the hard way.

During the time span from the time this case came out, Clouded Titles had been on the market for three years and had expanded from its 254-page original version to 432 pages (not the Mayday Edition, which is the revised final version). I knew that judges and attorneys were aware of it … and not just because of its consistent use in the courts.  By that time, the Circuit Clerk of Osceola County, Florida, Armando Ramirez, was introduced to the book and was encouraged by the public to make contact with the author, which led to the commissioning of another land record investigation, which was conducted roughly 90 days AFTER the mortgage loan servicers vowed in writing never to launder the land records with fraudulent documents again, as shown below:

OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION

The author of this post, once this document was made public, was attacked by the media in what appeared to be political retribution against the Clerk of the Circuit Court (Ramirez), who was again elected to his Clerk’s post in a majority vote the following election cycle.  However, this time, MERS did not play a role in the politicizing and demonizing of the report, which had an attorney opinion letter attached to it like the Williamson County report did.  Instead, the media and foreclosure mill law firms jumped into the fray, slamming the Clerk for spending county money on a report that they maliciously called a “foreclosure audit”.  Again, misuse of the COTA.  The Report issued to the Clerk was just that … a Report outlining the abuses that continued in his own land records from June 1, 2012 to June 1, 2014, well after the mortgage loan servicers agreed to stop putting false and misrepresentative documents in the land records, where they still appear to be continuing on through today!

The Bigger Mistake

What’s even worse is that a lot of wannabe “investigators” who claimed that their research was solid proof did not pass muster in other cases.  As I will demonstrate in the upcoming Chain Of Title Assessment Workshop, to be held online on the Clouded Titles website starting on February 1, 2020, this author has been pontificating all through the ages that Chain of Title Assessments (COTAs) are NOT EVIDENCE in court, despite the ignorance of litigants and their attorneys.  In this workshop, the author will cite a U.S. Supreme Court case that clearly identifies a COTA as research developed from multiple sources and compiled into a report, which this author has constantly maintained is to be used for case development and not as evidence in of itself.  But given the desperation of homeowners, along with the mistakes made by these alleged “foreclosure rescue services” that claim the COTA is their Holy Grail in order to make a buck, these assessments are STILL NOT EVIDENCE in court, as the most recent case out of Idaho demonstrates:

Losee v Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co, Sup Ct Idaho No 45721 (Nov 29, 2019)

Do you see the date on this case?  It was just issued the day before this author published this post! 

What in the hell are these people thinking?  If I have maintained that a 1943 United States Supreme Court ruling by this nation’s highest court mandates that COTAs cannot be relied on as evidence, why are these wannabe investigators and their litigants ignoring it?

Previously, much to my chagrin, I’ve warned attorneys NOT to waive my COTAs around in court.  One of them did in a Houston federal court and got screamed at by the judge.  This is where the joke about “judges screaming my name and it wasn’t during sex” evolved from. (“Who’s Dave Krieger????!!!!!!!!)

One other attorney in Michigan was forced to let a judge see the COTA (by the judge’s own insistence) because the attorney kept referring to the document while making arguments in court.  Once the judge read the document (assumedly during his lunch break), he got an education, even though it was still NOT being offered as evidence, and ordered the parties to settle the case as he stated, “neither one of you are going to like the way I rule on this one!”   In the end, the bank got the house back and the homeowners got their money back and then some.  This still does not mean that the COTA is evidence unless the material within the COTA is vetted and relied upon by expert witnesses or utilized to craft discovery to go after the underbelly of the other side’s arguments.

I beg of you … please do not continue to misuse these reports.  These reports are meant as investigative research and proper discovery must be utilized to vet the research.  Simply walking into court and waving these reports around screaming “Fraud This!” and “Fraud That!” will get you nowhere.

To get a real idea of HOW TO do a Chain of Title Assessment (COTA) on your own, where you can get a real education, I am offering the first online COTA Workshop on Saturday, February 1st (2020), in 4, 2-part segments, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.  Here’s the schedule of the online classes:

Sessions 1 and 2, Saturday, February 1, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 3 and 4, Saturday, February 8, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 5 and 6, Saturday, February 15, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 7 and 8, Saturday, February 22, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

I have revised the COTA to take the purpose of the workshop out of the “business model mode” and craft it into the “consumer mode” for the purposes of giving you a basic education into the realm of document identification and research.  Click the following link to leave your email address in the blank space provided and the Registration Form will be emailed to you.  Once you are enrolled in all four sessions, you will be able to access the online workshop presentation (as it will be recorded for future use) on the Clouded Titles website!

The Definition of Insanity Needs to Change in Your World!

I can tell you with a certainty that mine has!  In fact, I use COTA research to make money in my real estate investing.  Had homeowners going through foreclosure been thinking about Plan B instead of trying to fight the inevitable losing court battle ratios, America might have had better case law than what it has now.  With the banks creating as much negative case law against homeowners and as tilted as the system is against borrowers who don’t pay their mortgage payments, it’s time to change your mindset and use the COTA to your advantage.  My workshop strategies have now shifted into the realm of COTA use to make money to survive instead of defending your home in a losing battle.

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, workshop

WHEN JUDGES LISTEN … AND WHEN THEY DON’T!

(OP-ED) — The author of this post begs your consideration of the following foreclosure-related news item from the SE Texas Record (a journal published to highlight cases where the banks win and the homeowners lose, among other things) … for educational purposes only …

Notice the above Defendants?  

It should be well-decided among the legal community that suing MERS is fruitless, but people still listen to these half-baled arguments that MERS knew or should have known that its so-called “members” (which really are user-subscribers to the MERS® System) freely use MERS’s name (an acronym for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.) to assign notes and mortgages to anyone the servicers’ employees are told to assign them to, regardless of whether MERS really has any authority to do so.  Yet some attorneys are still smoking “legal crack” and are still naming MERS as a Defendant.

When will the legal community wake up to this grievous error?   MERS is a database run by Wall Street’s Intercontinental Exchange Inc. and NOT an entity with money or answers to anything.  An electronic database (nor its officers, of a shell corporation) are willing and able to give any plaintiff any discovery.  The real issue here is what the chain of title would have revealed if carefully analyzed.

Read the appellate ruling from the 1st Division of the Texas Court of Appeals if you like, for educational purposes only about how to get cases removed to federal court, where the federal judges (who are appointed for life) bend you over, screw you with no lube and hand you back to the state court after you beg for mercy.

Hernandez v MERS et al, 1st App Ct Tex No 01-18-00468-CV (Oct 22, 2019)

While not attempting to be so graphic, can you imagine the money these folks spent trying to stay in their home, to no avail?

Notice two of the Defendants … LSF8 Master Participation Trust and Caliber Home Loans, Inc.?  These two are married in a third-world debt collection scheme to screw homeowners.  LSF8 is no more of a trust than the LSF9 that this blog posted recently lost in a court battle in West Palm Beach, Florida at roughly the same time and space in the foreclosure world.  This is why I call it the “LSF8 (or 9) Masterbatory Participation Trust” because these jerk-offs do nothing more than spin third-party debt sell-offs into a package they claim is a “trust” but is nothing more than junk, defaulted mortgage loan pools and then call them “equitable instruments” and using their phony documents (where they incorporate MERS into the equation) to steal people’s homes.  U.S. Bank didn’t suffer any harm here because U.S. Bank as Trustee didn’t really pull the trigger.  Caliber Home Loans did.  I’ll bet if you looked at these folks’ assignments, Caliber Home Loan employees were using MERS to convey these toxic assets into these debt pools for the purposes of foreclosure … and they do it within the time frame that homeowners could challenge them anywhere.  In Texas, the state’s Civil Practice and Remedies Code (§ 16.033) allows you to challenge a recording that is less than two years old … and I can tell you … Caliber is stupid enough to file stuff within that challenge timeframe because it wants to steal your home, by any means possible. They’re greedy, remember?

MERS, Robosigners and Perjury

Sadly, these attorneys don’t realize that anyone signing as an “Officer” of MERS has to have a $5,000,000 fidelity bond and an errors and omissions policy covering their signing activities.  That requirement is mandated under MERS Rules of Membership for all robosigners.   So why aren’t these robosigners being sued in a Cancellation and Expungement action and made to produce these documents to prove they’re a legitimate, bona fide, MERS “Certifying Officer”??? (which is a joke in of itself) because these people have no idea what they’re signing at any given moment.

In my world, we don’t sue assignees and we don’t sue MERS.  We sue the robosigner and the notary (if the notary doesn’t have a bond) on the assignments, because the devil is in the details within the assignments, NOT THE NOTES!  When you start arguing NOTES, you lose because judges won’t listen.  Judges don’t care about assignments in foreclosure courts either.  If the party bringing the foreclosure has the note (somewhere in their possession), that’s good enough for the judge. How they got the note doesn’t matter to the judge either.  The judge just wants the case off their docket and YOU are nothing more than a statistic to them.  They can go home and sleep at night, knowing they put you out on the street, because they were simply doing their jobs.

In any scenario (and I don’t care what foreclosure defense attorneys have to say about it), MERS should never be a defendant. The parties who sign the assignment have a different story to tell (other than the stories MERS vomits in court).  These people are minimum wage employees (generally) that randomly sign hundreds of documents a day into these junk debt pools, because they can’t be foreclosed on and sold any other way.  The chains of title are so screwed up that it would take an Einstein to figure out how to quiet them in a quiet title action.  Sadly, they sell these junk debts to investors who buy them (like Fannie and Freddie’s crap) who attempt to peddle them or turn them into the nation’s rental pool.

Most people don’t recognize that if you hold the robosigner’s feet to the fire, you might find out that:

  1. The law firm doing the foreclosure had something to do with the manufacture of the assignment (subornation of perjury);
  2. The person signing the document as an officer of MERS didn’t have the required fidelity bond and E&O policy (lack of authority, perjury);
  3. The notary who acknowledged the document was part of the bigger picture in the scheme (notary fraud, false swearing); and
  4. The attorney bringing the case to court knew or should have known about the chicanery behind the scenes (especially if the law firm had the document returned to them after the dastardly deed was done).

All 50 states have laws against perjury on the land records … and they are all felonies.  Some states have stronger laws that recommend that these false documents be turned over to prosecutors to have these robosigners “dealt with”.  Yeah, right.  This is America.  No politician (dressed in district attorney or state’s attorney’s clothing) will risk their asses prosecuting someone connected to the scheme of things because they might find out the real truth … this stuff occurs on a grand scale all across America!

My take on this is doing a cancellation and expungement action on the phony document BEFORE the case gets to foreclosure. Ah, but wait!  We all sit idly by and don’t bother checking the land records for clues, do we?  Part of America’s complacency, I guess.

This is the sad state of America.  This is why you should NOT deal with banks and other financial institutions who sell their paper into the MERS® System.  Portfolio loans, owner finance on a clear title or nothing. Your choices are few.  Make good choices.

Coming to the Clouded Titles website in February … ONLINE CHAIN OF TITLE ASSESSMENT CLASSES … stay tuned!

2 Comments

Filed under OP-ED