Tag Archives: chain of title assessment

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!

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED

STARING AT DOUBLE D’S ???

(OP-ED) — The author of this post issues the following warning:  Make sure that you vet whoever it is you’re going to associate with in life, especially in the pursuit of fighting corrupt banks and those who may claim they have a “silver bullet”.   There are lots of naysayers and gainsayers occupying the Internet these days.  Thus, surfing the Internet looking for answers to foreclosure dilemmas and jumping at the first thing that sounds plausible to you is risky!

The Internet is a dangerous place … full of information and disinformation!

It has come to my attention that certain entities out there have taken somewhat of a liking to the cancellation and expungement actions discussed in the recent Las Vegas workshop, covered by this author and Al West, Esq.  The reason Al West teaches this stuff is because he’s done it before.  He has eliminated both deeds of trust and assignments from land records in California.  Since then, there has been an evolution of the cancellation and expungement action, one that has certainly been overlooked by attorneys elsewhere, because they can’t make a big return off of doing “sniper approach” tactics.  Nope.  They want to file 20-count lawsuits because that racks up tens of thousands of dollars in fees for them.  This is part of the reason why the justice system has failed America … use of the “shotgun approach”.

So they take to the Internet, take an approach to the C&E and “embellish” it to their own tastes, whether it comports with what we taught (or not).  There’s nothing worse than filing a C&E and not sticking to the point and letting the other side’s servicer or lender come in and ruin things by changing the judge’s mind, even though the law says otherwise.

Damn every judge that won’t follow the law!   I hope they all rot in hell! 

As Al West explained in the C&E Workshop, judges are all worried about their pensions which are invested in these REMIC trusts.  Thus, any time something that looks “legitimately suspect” comes before them, they look into the end result and what it might mean for them before they issue a ruling against the party filing the C&E. If you bring up the note, you deserve to lose, because the note has nothing to do with the false statements made on the assignments and other title documents, including releases of lien and even notices of lis pendens!

Discussing the implications of foul play in an assignment is one thing.  Telling a judge the note has something to do with the false statements in an assignment is quite another.

Anyone who wants to make securitization the focal point of their argument in a C&E is putting their cases at risk as well.  This document does not talk about who has what endorsement on what note.  The documents filed in the land records serve as constructive notice, no matter how long they’ve been there!  Notes are only used as SUPPORTING EVIDENCE!

Thank you Patriots! 

And I’m not talking about the football team either ….  I’m talking about those well-meaning individuals out there that want to pro se, pro per, sui juris, su-eeee, su-eeee (how you call a pig) whatever that screwed up the land records filing false liens against judges, county officials and people with whom they have an axe to grind.  THOSE are the folks that caused the “two-edged sword” legislation to come into fruition because they filed documents into the land records that were clearly criminal, causing every state legislature to pass laws prohibiting the recording of such documents (that contain false information).  What’s good for the goose, then, is good for the gander. Those who got in trouble for it went to jail, unless they were a mortgage loan servicer or its employees.  Then, they just flat out used falsely-stated information in an assignment to simply “steal the house”!  They’re proud of it too!

THE COTA

Unless you understand how your title documents come into play in the land record (which I why I started out doing Chain Of Title Assessments), you won’t have a clue WHY your chain of title is screwed up.  The interrelation of the land records has everything to do with the outcome of the C&E and a judge has to be educated well enough in the process to understand that there are issues with a document that cannot be ignored, which is why we have expert witness attorneys who will testify on behalf of the claimant, in an effort to sustain the integrity of the court, to save the judge from being tossed into prison under state statute, for aiding and abetting felony perjury!

Do you feel as if you’re in the middle of a freaking carnival?

There’s a dog and pony show jumping on our bandwagon at every turn … and we don’t even have a bandwagon!  So why do lawyers say that homeowners love the simplicity of a C&E?  Because lawyers can’t make any money doing them.  Or so they think.  Had they come to the workshop, like some lawyers did, they would have learned that in certain instances, there are methods for securing additional funds to bolster the war chest that are out there and available to attorneys (ripe for the picking).  In the alternative, case law has taught us a few ways to take an individual’s confession and turn it into gold.

Yet, the carnies are out there!   You know, those carnival barkers!  Yelling at everyone to come and see the greatest show on earth???  It’s like going to the circus and you’re the main attraction.   And you look up at the trapeze artist … all in glitter … and wonder … will she fall?   Do you ever feel like you’re swinging in the wind like her?

The C&E workshop video set is almost complete!  We’ll have it available on the Clouded Titles website soon!  Get educated, then get ugly!

Oh …

And those Double D’s you were staring at?

They stand for DUE DILIGENCE!

 

11 Comments

Filed under OP-ED, Securitization Issues, workshop

SIX YEARS LATER … AND THEY’RE STILL ROBOSIGNING!

OP-ED — 

In March of 2012, all of the major servicers and the 49 States Attorneys General (except Oklahoma) inked an agreement wherein the servicers would stop the then-common practice of “robosigning” documents.  Six years later and it’s still going on.  I thought it best to clarify a few things before discussing where we are today.

Robosigning was a term referenced often by the late Kings County, New York Judge Arthur Schack, wherein he described the act of affixing signatures to documents in such a manner that: (a.) the signatures were illegible; (b.) the signatures could have been affixed by anyone [also known as surrogate signing]; (c.) contained information that was grossly distorted or misrepresentative [in HSBC v Taher_Schack, he noted that the address of the REMIC was at the same address as that of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC in Palm Beach County, Florida], and now Ocwen Financial is acquiring PHH Mortgage, which was notorious for carrying on the same process that prompted the AG settlement.

Typical aspects (I call them “markers”) of robosigning include: (a.) scribbled signatures; (b.) varied signatures of the same name; and (c.) signatures different from the indicated name typed underneath the signature line.

Surrogate Signing came to light in the wake of the discovery of Linda Green, whose name was so easy to sign that everyone at DOCX was doing it: THE NEXT HOUSING SHOCK

As you may know, the President of DOCX ended up in Club Fed.  This conviction (of Lorraine M. Brown) was the only significant “slap on the hand” for bad behavior (of a document mill officer) that resulted in the loss of millions of homes in foreclosure actions through fraudulently-manufactured-then-publicly-recorded documents.

Typical markers of surrogate signing can be found on documents generated prior to 2012, that are commonly (and still) relied upon to tie together a chain of title for the purposes of “stealing” a borrower’s home.  Just because the borrower signed a note and mortgage doesn’t give the banking cartel the right to be sloppy about the way they followed their own procedures involving securitization (or the lack thereof).

Notary Fraud can occur in a multitude of ways.  Each state has specific regulations governing the commission of notaries public.  One doing any kind of research however, will need to pay attention to the regulations of certain states, which have (for all intents and purposes) watered down the obligations and governing regulations of notaries.  Some states do not require a notary bond.  Some states do not require notaries keep a journal of every notarial acknowledgment they perform.  Some states don’t even require that the notary physically witness the signature of the person executing the document.  What those in state government do not understand is that they are complicit in the very behaviors they put Lorraine Brown in prison for because local prosecutors do nothing to stop any of the foregoing behaviors for fear of putting their own political asses in a sling.

Some states (like California) require the notary to sign under penalty of perjury.  Perjury is a criminal matter, which can result in jail time.  Local prosecutors could easily make short work of handling a notary fraud case, simply by investigating the notary … it only takes one conviction to send a message … but they don’t.

As a “marker”, notary fraud could be the result of: (a.) acknowledging a signature that wasn’t affixed by the party claiming to have executed the document; (b.) acknowledging an execution when the party affixing their signature wasn’t present at signing; (c.) acknowledging an execution of a document as a party to a group of signers who routinely manufacture assignments of mortgage or deed of trust (similar to what went on in Simi Valley, California between 2012 and 2016 at Bank of America, N.A.’s robomill); (d.) participating as a notary in any document manufacturing scheme wherein the information placed within the document is false and misrepresentative and was placed there intentionally (civil conspiracy) wherein the notary was directed to participate as part of the signing process with the knowledge that what the notary was doing was illegitimate; and (e.) pre-acknowledging documents and affixing a seal with no signatures placed upon the document.

Self-Assignment is a common marker of the major banking institutions who can’t find paperwork, so they have their own employees (whether the major bank is servicing the loan or not) make stuff up out of thin air.  An example of this follows (with my analysis).  This is also included in the scheme of document manufacturing.

All of the foregoing “markers” are part of a scheme called “Document Manufacturing”

I talk about this extensively in the book Clouded Titles, which has undergone several updates between its original publication in December 2010 and its final “Mayday Edition” on May 1, 2016 because of newly-discovered information pertinent to investigations by this author through Chain of Title Assessments (COTAs) this author has conducted.

Document Manufacturing is the process by which multiple parties are retained by a mortgage loan servicer to act in a capacity of a bank official, using Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (on many an occasion) to further “dilute” the chain of title by obfuscating the path of ownership from the originating lender (many of which were bankrupt and out of business at the time the document was executed) to the current “alleged” owner of the mortgage loan.  Most of this process takes place within ninety (90) days AFTER a borrower allegedly stops making their mortgage loan payments.  Customarily, most of this scheme takes place within the walls of the mortgage loan servicer’s own document manufacturing plant or at a contractor-based, third-party document mill.

The scheme may involve witnesses also attesting to the signature of the alleged “officer” signing the assignment. Many times, these witnesses are notaries (who should know better).  Many times, these witnesses simply sit around the signing table, shuffling documents from person to person, all affixing their signatures to a pre-determined spot on the document.  All of these documents are then bundled up and taken to a different part of the building and placed on the desk of a notary who will then acknowledge the documents and affix the notary seal to each one, claiming the signers “personally appeared” before them, when in fact, THAT did not happen!

The scheme is designed to place everyone in the manufacturing chain at better than “arms length” away from the servicer, as a means to reduce liability.  This would bring this author to an obvious conclusion that it would be more difficult to seek out and depose those who participated in the scheme because of costs and time involved, making it virtually impossible to defend one’s property from theft by document fraud.

AND HERE IT IS … 2018 … AND …

… we still have not gotten past being dishonest about providing solid proof of effective transfer of the promissory note in conjunction with an assignment of a mortgage or deed of trust.

As the result of the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION, we learned that having local law enforcement investigate matters of this nature was way over their heads (let alone their pay grades).  They are either in denial or superbly arrogant about having to investigate what they said were “victimless crimes”.  The investigation involved the examination of documents in the land records from June 1, 2012 (after the AG settlement was reached) and June 1, 2014 (a 2-year span).   Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. was used as a research guide, because it led the examination team directly to all of the securitized RMBS documents, which contained continued patterns of everything I’ve described in this article.

As a means of education (because I can’t give legal advice) … let’s examine a couple of recently-filed documents:

In Osceola County, Florida, where we previously conducted an examination of their land records, paid for with Osceola County taxpayer dollars, I happened to find this recently-manufactured self assignment:

In the foregoing instance, I analyze the following suspect issues for your evaluation: 

(1.) This assignment of mortgage was done by JPMorgan Chase Bank’s own employees in their document manufacturing plant in Monroe, Louisiana on January 10, 2018.

(2.) The document could have been executed to Chase by Standard Pacific Mortgage, Inc., without the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Standard Pacific Mortgage, Inc. is still in business in Irvine, California. Why then did Chase employees, in a civil conspiracy with Nationwide Title Clearing, Inc. in Florida, have to then create this document?  Why didn’t the originating Lender create and execute the document?

(3.) If you’ll notice, “Judy G. Jackson”s printed name appears to have been inserted into the document by the party creating AND executing it.  The notary did not even fill in the space provided.

(4.) In this instance, the notary claims that Judy G. Jackson was “personally known, who did say that he/she/they” (the notary is too lazy to delineate for gender and plurality to make the document appear more legitimate). Nowhere in the document does it say that Louisiana Notary Amy Gott, who has a lifetime commission, actually “personally witnessed” Jackson’s signature.

(5.) There is no proof of authority anywhere on the document, indicating that Jackson had the authority to execute the instrument, which was signed on January 10, 2018.

(6.) The document misrepresents the mailing address for the lender as that of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.’s post office box in Flint, Michigan.

(7.) Notice that the Assignment of Mortgage ONLY “conveys” the Mortgage (and NOT the Note)?

(8.) The document was further obfuscated by the return address (after recording) as that of Nationwide Title Clearing, Inc. (“NTC”) in Palm Harbor, Florida (one of the companies targeted as a third-party document mill in the Osceola County Forensic Examination).  Why send it to NTC in the first place, unless NTC had something to do with its manufacture?

(9.) Notice the 1999 corporate seal for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.?  The employees at JPMorgan Chase Bank misrepresented their authority using “MERS” to obfuscate the chain of title.  NTC obviously has a document manufacturing, archive contract with Chase, which could be further played out through discovery.

(10.) You will notice from doing your own research that the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to obfuscate the chain of title with a “place card-type” position of the “nominee” (agent), has been used for so long that our very own United States Government and County Clerks and Recorders (who are blind, or reprobate, or both) simply choose to let this lie proliferate.

EXAMPLE #2: 

In the foregoing instance, I analyze the following suspect issues for your evaluation: 

(1.) This assignment of mortgage was done by a third-party document mill in their document manufacturing plant in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on February 21, 2018.

(2.) The originating Lender (IndyMac Bank, F.S.B., now out of business) obviously used Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to transfer its loans within the MERS® System via the use of a third-party mill, who couldn’t even be bothered to put the 1999 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. corporate seal on the document.

(3.) If you’ll notice, the party signing the document is using a non-designated “official title” for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.?   Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. only allows signers to use the titles of “Assistant Secretary” or “Vice President” (not as shown).

(4.) The pre-printed document contains the name of the signer in the notarial execution in all capital letters, which means it was inserted into the document using computer software.  The signer couldn’t even sign her own name in full.

(5.) Geez … every other Florida assignment I’ve seen had two (2) witness signatures contained within the document.  I guess these third-party doc mills don’t care if they follow Florida law or not, right?

(4.) Knowing how third-party document manufacturing plants behave, I would debate the use of the words “personally appeared”, given what we know about signing plant floor plans.

(5.) There is no proof of authority anywhere on the document, indicating that Salicce (the signer) had the authority to execute the instrument in that capacity, let alone have personal knowledge of its contents (robosigning).

(6.) The document doesn’t even list the mailing address for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., even though it claims to have an interest in the Assignment (as the “Assignor”) … pretty blatant huh?

(7.) Notice that the Assignment of Mortgage ONLY “conveys” the Mortgage (and NOT the Note)?

(8.) Notice that since IndyMac was out of business, a third-party document mill had to use Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to obfuscate the chain of title to convey the mortgage (ONLY) into the REMIC directly, which by the way, had a cut-off date of June 1, 2005 and a Closing Date of June 15, 2005, in violation of the governing regulations for that REMIC, which can be found here: http://www.secinfo.com/dqTm6.z1en.htm.

(9.) Also notice that the name of the REMIC is incorrectly listed.  According to SEC records, the official name of the REMIC is the Indymac Home Equity Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Trust, Series Inabs 2005-B.  As far as I can see, there are are least three (3) distinct misrepresentations under Florida Criminal Code § 817.535 in the forgoing document.

(10.) Do we have possible notary fraud here?   Do you not see in the notarial execution where the notary claims to have acknowledged that Salicce (an employee of Visionet Systems Inc.) was an “Assistant Vice President” of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. when in fact, there is no such designation?  And from the scribbled signature of the notary, is it possible she executed this document without the signer being present and does this often enough to get writer’s cramp signing scribbled signatures a lot?  It might merit requesting her notary application from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to see if that signature (on her application) matches the signature on this document.  Also notice the acknowledgment says nothing about “personally appeared” either.

By the way, the bold-faced type you see in the foregoing assignment is part of the boiler-plate software template used by document mills to create these suspect documents.

THIS BEHAVIOR ALSO COVERS “RELEASES OF MORTGAGES” AND “DEEDS OF RECONVEYANCE”

If you think that the foregoing behavior only applies to assignments, you should look at Releases of liens as well. Of particular note is the issue of potential unauthorized practice of law, which is a felony in Florida and most other states, for executing and recording documents known to contain false information (perjury) without attorney supervision.

I have successfully participated in removing (by expungement) a bogus Release of Mortgage out of the land records in Hillsborough County, Florida and the existing “alleged pretender lender” has absolutely no idea it now has a competing lien ahead of its foreclosure attempts.  This is why foreclosure law firm attorneys are so imbecilic when it comes to “getting their story straight” when they try to foreclose on a mortgage without FIRST checking the chain of title for competing liens … which brings me to my next point:

Any lawyer for the banks that comes into court and regurgitates these misrepresentations is likely to have committed not only felony perjury and potential multiple ethics violations … but any subsequent law firm will not be able to continue their tirade on the property once the initial violations have been exposed.

Perhaps it is now time to go after the foreclosure mill lawyers instead of just their clients!

My final parting shot goes against the state district and circuit attorneys who refuse to criminally prosecute these people.  Don’t yell at me!  You elected them!  You and I can both probably think to ourselves what worthless POS these people are if they aren’t going to do what’s right.

If you don’t know your rights … you don’t have any!

Dave Krieger is the author of the book Clouded Titles and has a weekly radio show on WKDW-FM in North Port, Florida covering consumer issues. He serves as a paralegal and chain of title consultant to attorneys as well as performs chain of title assessments for consumers as well as  forensic examinations and audits of county land records, despite the fact he is a disenfranchised citizen of whatever you want to call this economically messed up country you live in.

Coming soon … How to deal with the next financial collapse in America! 

2 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

U.S. NINTH CIRCUIT REVERSES FDCPA DISMISSAL; CAN’T USE STATE LAWSUIT TO CONFOUND FEDERAL LAW!

BREAKING NEWS — 

While not presidential, the U. S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has reversed a Nevada FDCPA case, declaring in part:

The panel reversed the district court’s dismissal of an action brought against a debt collector under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act.

The panel held that a debt collector cannot avoid liability under the FDCPA by obtaining the debtor’s lawsuit through a state court writ of execution.

The panel concluded that such a procedure frustrates the Act’s purpose and is thus conflict- preempted. The panel remanded the case for further proceedings.

To read the case, click here: Arrellano v Clark Co Coll Svc LLC et al, 9th App Cir No 16-15467 (Nov 17, 2017)

OP-ED —

Sadly, too many U.S. District Court judges are quick to dismiss debtor claims.  They appear to treat these types of actions as if the debtor is trying to escape debt, which in many cases, is NOT the point.

The first point here is: The debt collector bought its own lawsuit from the Clark County, Nevada Sheriff for $250 in order to avoid the appearance of an FDCPA violation.

The second point here is: The debt collector cannot give the alleged debtor a 30-day notice to dispute the validity of the debt (or any portion thereof) while engaged in litigation that requires a 20-day response (answer).

See Ellis v. Solomon and Solomon, PC, 591 F. 3d 130 – Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2010 – Google Schola (a Connecticut-originated debt collection case) for further clarification on the improper use of lawsuits).

In my opinion, the 9th Circuit did the right thing.

COMING SOON: FDCPA Webinar #3 … Class Actions in FDCPA Claims!  

ALSO COMING SOON: Chain of Title Assessment (COTA) Online Webinar … a one-day, online webinar workshop (divided into (5) 90-minute sessions (all presented on the same day).

Sit in the comfort of your home at your computer and learn how to analyze chain of title!

Learn how to recognize chain of title issues and what the purpose of the various legal remedies are to combat them!

Save time and money by learning to avoid making foolish investments in property that will require exorbitant legal fees to “fix” the title!

Learn how to do COTAs to do your own legal research to save money on attorney’s fees in case development!

Learn how to do COTAs to make money in the future helping others in their “good fight”!

… and BTW, Happy Thanksgiving!  Blessings to you and yours for your health, wisdom and prosperity.

1 Comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED