Tag Archives: document manufacturing

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 8

(OP-ED, first posted: September 22, 2018) — 

The writer of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  Any use of the theories or ideas suggested in this post is entirely at your discretion and will probably result in disaster without the proper legal help.

In the segment numbered “Part 7” of these successive posts, there was a boatload of case law wherein judges did the right thing.  As you probably noticed from reading In re Wilson, it involved improper reporting of the posting of payments (all while the foreclosure was still being commenced).  Another case (M & T Bank v. Smith) involved multiple manufactured promissory notes (after the fact) that could have not possibly happened the way the bank’s attorneys said they did. To that end, the judge did the right thing, by: (1) holding an evidentiary hearing; and (2) sanctioning the Marshall C. Watson Law Firm, noting that the Marshall C. Watson Law Firm has gained notoriety for filing false assignments in the land records!  This is EXACTLY what I intimated was STILL GOING ON in the real property records, included in the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION.

And sadly, these same attorneys that are representing the banks’ servicers went to the same law schools as the foreclosure defense attorneys seated at the opposing table.  The “good ‘ol boy network” reaches up into the judiciary, because judges were attorneys at one point.  Everybody who’s anybody knows somebody in the profession.  Their relationships are more than cordial.  Many of them run so deep that some foreclosure defense attorneys have tempered their aggressive behaviors, despite the fact they want to do the first thing by their clients (whether their clients know it or not).  The bigger part of the problem is the one thing that all attorneys learn in law school: find some way to settle.  When someone’s home is at stake, settling for less than a completely positive outcome shouldn’t even be on the table.  In fact, it’s an insult to the homeowner’s intelligence (what was the lawyer thinking?).  This is not to say that someone cannot rise up and call this chicanery for what it is: fraud on the court, compounded by felony components and ethical violations worthy of disbarment.  This is what should have happened in every case posted in Part 7!

Aside from all of the arguments over the various issues you hear in the courtroom, the judges keep tabs on everything that’s said and they watch the clock fastidiously. You only get so much time, which is why getting all of your discovery done ahead of time is important, along with the intended depositions.  This is all part of building that big, bad ass paper trail I talked about on earlier posts. The bigger the paper trail, the more evidence you have to help the affected insurance company either deny a claim or pay out on a claim!

Now we’re going to get even more serious …

The Oregon State Bar was sued by two of its member attorneys in U.S. District Court under 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and 1988.   Read the 7-page Complaint here:

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

CASE IN POINT: THE DETAILS

Notice here that the Defendant is referred to as “a public corporation” established pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes § 9.010 (imagine the liability there)?

Also notice that on the last page, the Oregon State Bar put out a press release that smacks of political overtones.  Is this organization a State Bar or a political action committee?

And this is just the tip of the iceberg.  By publishing that single-page ideologue, the State Bar hierarchy has just “positioned its own agenda”.  And you wonder where judges get their agendas?  Who put this “free house” crap in their heads in the first place?  This is only part of the bullshit that has most Americans distrusting their judicial system.  That is not a good thing under “the system of things”.  Stuff like that leads to civil unrest (or hasn’t Congress noticed?) or civil disobedience.  Hey wait!  We’re already seeing that in America … just read the State Bar’s ideologue!

The State Bar Associations have errors and omissions insurance that can be challenged if they fail (as a public corporation) to do the right thing by the people and instead, push their own agendas on the body politic.  I’m talking foreclosed homes by attorneys who lied in court and used phony assignments to bolster their claims of standing, created by servicers and their employees to steal private property because they didn’t do the paperwork properly when the loan was first executed (and potentially securitized).  This makes the entire process liable (if not in the least, suspect), especially when the state bar (in this case, Oregon) sets a bad example by putting out political statements instead of remaining neutral and unbiased.  Why not say something like most judges do in foreclosure courts (and I’m being really sarcastic here):

“When’s the last time you made a mortgage payment?”

At that point, it doesn’t matter what you say, the judge already has his mind made up, despite whether the banks’ attorneys are all accessories to felony conspiracy and fraud, along with a multitude of ethical violations that could get them disbarred (and potentially imprisoned)  I am waiting for the day (and I think I’ll see it in my lifetime) when a judge gets his bond revoked and gets removed from the bench because he (or she) was warned of the felony components of the attorney’s behavior (for the bank) and ignored it … and didn’t do the right thing.  The damage is suffered when the judge issues the final judgment of foreclosure.  At that point, a sale date is set and all is lost unless somebody recants or the judge changes his mind.

And it’s all based on the phony assignments.  Shouldn’t someone be held liable?  I’m not talking about a corporate fine here either.  I’m talking about prison time for the perpetrators of the documents! 

MOTIONS TO VACATE

Lest the judge not have fair warning and be allowed to change his (or her) mind, based on newly-proffered evidence, the bank’s attorneys may end up losing more than their case.  In fact, because of felony behavior, or any collusion with felony behavior (i.e., Oh, sorry I robbed that bank … I was only the getaway driver; here’s the money back) … fraud can pierce not only corporate veils, but all operating agreements sanctioned by the state to where the individual managing attorneys and partners are all personally liable to the homeowner.  If it’s a major law firm, they’ll probably try to avoid filing an insurance claim, because the felony behavior would “come out in the wash” and the firm would never get insurance coverage again and would have to either self-insure or dissolve. And that, my friends, is how we take down a law firm … because they’re going to want to settle … but if there’s a class action of over 1,000 homeowners … who is going to cough up all that money to pay those 1,000 claims under statute?  Someone is not only going “broke”, but the State Bar had better make sure they don’t commit felonies again (through disbarment).  Now they get to figure out, with a felony involving moral turpitude, good luck getting a job at Wal-Mart.  How would they pay off those $250,000+ in student loans?  Boo-hoo!  (sobbing)  … NOT!

So the Motion to Vacate serves as a tool to make the court aware of the illicit behavior … and why.  If the court ignores it, the judge and the county he acts in become participants in the fraud and felony behavior.  This is when things get dicey.  The “system of things” is going to try to draw a “fine line” as to whether the behavior was unintentional or malicious.  This is why we need court transcripts!  If the judge makes an “agenda statement” (i.e., “No one gets a free house!”; “When’s the last time you made a mortgage payment?”; or “You’ve lived in that house for free long enough!”).  This type of speech not only promotes a specific “agenda”, it could lead to more sinister issues. AND …

No one to this point has thought to inform the county’s risk manager with the proper ammunition.  Every pro se litigant that has tried going through the risk manager has failed miserably because they do NOT know HOW to properly “connect” with the person responsible for “damage control”.

SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY

All judges in every state enjoy this privilege.  Unfortunately, many of them let it go to their heads.

States also enjoy this privilege.  Isn’t that amazing how they get to legislate themselves this privilege?

Judges get to “play God for 5 minutes” in foreclosure court, not realizing the scenario may present itself to mandates that require them to “do the right thing”.  Because they have “agendas” (“NO ONE GETS A FREE HOUSE!”), they are more quick to “step into the pile of shit” that is about to be created for them.  They have to answer to a judicial review board.  If it can be shown that a felony was committed, on top of multiple ethical violations … and the judge did nothing about it after being called out on those violations … their sovereign immunity is in jeopardy.  Any judge reading this article should take to heart what I’m saying, because the counties are self-insured and most of its officials have to answer to voters.  What if that class action also includes the judge (or judges) involved in the multiple felonies committed in hundreds of cases still applicable in their county?  What if the statutes of limitation are tolled because of the ongoing behavior?  Sure, it’s going to be a sticking point, but, the fact is, no insurance company or bonding company is going to shell out any legal fees to pay for the accessory criminal behavior of an attorney or judge in representing them (paying their attorney’s fees).  The judge will not be able to get another bond, ever, because his or her would be revoked.  That “bond” is an insurance policy designed by “the system of things” to compensate the inured for their losses.   The “senior judges” that were brought out of retirement to preside over foreclosure courts could find themselves and their estate liable as well.  In most states, personal injury judgments are NOT dischargeable in bankruptcy … especially when the parties were warned of potential felony issues and ignored them! 

If the entire Supreme Court of the State of West Virginia can be impeached for felony misbehavior (embezzlement, unjust enrichment and misappropriation of state property), then what makes the judges in the foreclosure courts think they can get away with imposing their political agendas on homeowners when the banks and their servicers are feloniously culpable for fraudulent document manufacturing (or in the least, being co-conspirators to that effect)?

And no, this is NOT going to collapse the entire system of things.  This “too big to fail” bullshit is nothing more than fear mongering.  The “system of things” was created “By the People, For the People”.

Thus, if a class action lawsuit of affected homeowners went after just ONE LAW FIRM and its supervising attorney and its managing partners and took a judge along for the ride as well, especially if the judge had anything to do with the properties he issued orders of final judgments against, now THAT would be something!  That would send a clear message that the “safeguards” that are in place in “the system of things” actually work!

C & E’s JUST BECAME MORE EFFECTIVE! 

These same principles work outside of the realm of the foreclosure proceeding, especially when challenging phony documents or statements made in the pleadings of foreclosure mill attorneys that are false and misrepresentative.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that an Affidavit from an Expert Witness Attorney who identifies the false and misrepresentative information, along with the ethical violations, will strike discord in the heart of the lawyer(s) bringing the foreclosure action.  And you wonder why there are substitutions of counsel when things get dicey in a foreclosure case.  Again, it has everything to do with something illegal happening behind the scenes that the foreclosure mills want to avoid exposure on.  That makes the C & E (Cancellation & Expungement) action even more important!

C & E actions are declaratory in nature.  They open up discovery like a Pandora’s Box.  Once the court is notified of the statutory and ethical violations, it must do the right thing and hold a hearing to preserve the sanctity of the justice system.  If ignored, the judge hearing the case deserves what’s coming because the entire “system” that’s supposed to be in place (in his Court) just went to shit!  Then it’s no holds barred.  His county is self-insured and would rather put him on administrative leave and attempt a crack at “damage control” and quietly settling out of court.  Of course, this is why attorneys are taught to settle FIRST in law school.  That way, they don’t have to air dirty laundry in front of the judge.  Again, and I reiterate this with utmost sincerity, most Americans don’t trust the justice system as it is, which is why “the system of things” is in existence … it all involves insurance and who pays for the damage claims, if in fact they pay out anything (this work to the opposing party’s detriment, or it could work to your benefit … you don’t get both most of the time).

THE CONSPIRACY AND THE UNDERLYING TORT

Fraud is a tort.  The elements of fraud are also expensive to prove.  The elements of negligence however are not.  KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN … BUT FAILED TO ACT would seem to apply here.  This is much easier to prove, especially if it was willful.  Imagine getting discovery from one of the robosigners or the notary involved in the document creation, all singing like canaries to avoid felony perjury prosecution.   What are the banks and their servicers (and title companies) going to do?  Kill all the notaries so they can’t testify against them.  Three words here: Remember Tracy Lawrence?

Misrepresentation is also a tort.   Couple that with negligence and you have negligent misrepresentation.   Go to your jury instructions to find out WHAT you have to prove to win your case … see here, see here (courtesy of the State of Tennessee, where MERS ain’t shit!):

Jury_Instructions_-_Misrepresentation

Jury_Instructions_-_Negligence

Remember (from previous posts) that conspiracy is only actionable as a tort in certain states (by statute).  In a majority of states, conspiracy, while not actionable, can be used to prove an underlying tort, through discovery, while exposing all of the parties involved, especially if a law firm is involved in creating the phony assignment being used to prove standing to foreclose on you!   Yes, it costs money dammit!  You want justice?

 

Advertisements

3 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 6

(OP-ED, first posted: September 11, 2018) —

The writer of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  Any use of the theories or ideas suggested in this post is entirely at your discretion and will probably result in disaster without the proper legal help.

In my last episode (Part 5) of this series of posts, I talked about risk aversion and the creation of a paper trail.  In this episode, I cover the “why” this becomes necessary.

DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF A CLAIM

The very first thing I look at (as a title consultant) is the chain of title, especially the warranty or grant deed (proof of ownership), the mortgage (or deed of trust) and any subsequent assignments coming against the chain of title.  All of these documents (in certified form) become the initial evidence in support of any claim I may have against a law firm, a judge or any other party that put that false and misrepresentative information into the public record and then relied on it to steal my property.  After all, in judicial states, where I see most of the atrocities committed, the foreclosure mill attorneys are the ones attaching these documents in their pleadings, as exhibits, or in the alternative, making reference to said exhibits, to be used as evidence to support their complaints to justify the foreclosure.

The pleadings themselves (in original or amended form) also become part of the evidence package in support of my claim, because they contain the language that relies on the false and misrepresentative statements where an assignment was posited or referenced therein as evidence in support of their claim.  This package should include every single document placed within the court docket, including the index sheet … certified copies (and 1 plain copy for review). 

You’re probably asking yourself where the promissory note comes into play here, because judicial states mandate you have to have the original note in order to foreclose. In non-judicial states, possession of the note is not required to foreclose; thus, all foreclosures are assumed to be legal unless otherwise challenged.  This means that if you’re in one of the non-judicial states, you have to institute suit based on the chain of title you have, in order to start the paper trail.  Thus, non-judicial state property owners are at a distinct disadvantage because they must spend the money filing a lawsuit to stop the foreclosure and obtain a temporary restraining order (TRO) and they are limited at best as to what is provable and what isn’t because the other side has not responded to the suit.  You can’t make boisterous claims either, as you will be denied the TRO and that is what you’re seeking to shut down the foreclosure sale.   You see, until the other side responds, they’ve created no paper trail you can assert contains false and misrepresentative statements, which is why I like using a C & E (an acronym for Cancellation & Expungement Complaint) “right out of the gate” if I realize I might not be able to make my mortgage loan payments any more.  Waiting until the 11th hour to file one of these Complaints (in of itself) has been definitely proven to be a waste of time and financial resources.  Filing a wrongful foreclosure action (before the fact) is also a waste of time and financial resources because the foreclosure has not occurred yet (and this is supported by case law).  I mention all of this because your research becomes fundamental as part of creating the paper trail.

Any oral statements made in court have to be supported by some sort of record.  This is why we have court reporters.  Most pro se litigants and uneducated homeowners conveniently forget to retain a court reporter to document everything said in open court to their disadvantage. This means that with no court record, there’s nothing to take up on appeal or challenge because you’ve “stiffed” yourself out of a paper trail.  Besides, having a court reporter has been shown to keep the judge honest.  Don’t think that just because the county can afford to have its own court reporter there means you can simply rely on getting a copy of the transcript from the county’s court reporter.  They are backlogged with work and will take their time getting anything to you, at a time when having a transcript of the proceedings might be timely necessary.  This always works to the homeowner’s disadvantage.  That is deliberate!  Why?  Because the county is using its own court reporter to “cover its own ass” and you can bet stuff will be left out of the record.  Then it’s your word against the county’s.  So, tis better to get your own court reporter!  You need to create your own “timely paper trail” for future use and reference.  This is not a traffic ticket we’re talking about here!

Discovery is vital whether or not you are doing a C & E (which allows you to do discovery of the party executing the assignment and the notary who acknowledged the assignment) or a full-blown complaint to stop the foreclosure.  Discovery responses becomes part of your evidence package … and the “paper trail”!  If you don’t propound discovery on the other side or at least the relevant parties (the ones who created the assignment), you’re on a sinking ship.  All of the discovery (and the responses you get) become part of the paper trail.

Depositions are a must!  These are taken using a court reporter who writes down every single word that is spoken and many of them use video cameras (which is allowed) to take taped statements, which is even more intimidating.  I find that going after the creator of the document, the executor of the document and the notary who acknowledged the document are vital to creating a proper paper trail (not so much the creator of the document, unless you’re trying to solidify that the law firm or servicer was involved in a civil conspiracy with the agents who executed the assignment).  You’re only talking a minimum of TWO DEPOSITIONS here … the executor of the assignment and the notary who acknowledged it.  What authority did they have to execute the document?  Where is the notary’s bond?  Is there even a bond?  Can we attack the notary’s commission even though there is no bonding requirement?  YOU BET!  Attacking a notary’s bond (if there is one to go after) can be a source of cash flow to support your court fight. You can bet the other side will object to everything you ask for because they don’t want anything said on the record that can be used against them in court.

In all matters related to your case, PHONE CALLS DO NOT WORK!  You cannot take phone calls into court!  DO NOT CALL THE NOTARY!  Do not contact the notary by mail!  If you’re sending them a subpoena to appear at a deposition … their deposition … you do it through a process server … which is also a legitimate part of your paper trail!   I have people who have contacted me who do exactly what I just suggested NOT TO DO.  They scare the notary into hiding.  When it does come time to serve them with a subpoena, they can’t be found.  Duh!  And these people actually think they’re doing the right thing?  Seriously?  What part of desperation is incorporated into stupidity?  This is where you have to put your emotions aside and start thinking “common sense”.

THE EXPERT WITNESS AFFIDAVIT AND LIVE COURT TESTIMONY

I’m talking “expert witness attorney” here, not your average forensic loan or securitization auditor (who thinks they’re an expert witness).  Why an attorney for an expert witness?  Allow me to re-arrange your brain’s priorities through the following three reasons:

REASON #1: Litigation Consultant … your expert witness attorney can also serve as a litigation consultant to help you frame some damning discovery centered around statutory violations!  This is important because using the stuff I mentioned previously in The Quiet Title War Manual has nothing to do whether or not you can challenge assignments because you’re not a third-party beneficiary.  That is a bullshit banking argument that has nothing to do with the statute in question!  The statutes speak directly to the recording of documents known to contain false and misrepresentative information!  Separate the two distinctions in your mind because the borrower’s name is in the assignment; the borrower is a party to securitization (if that’s an issue) and because the document involves misrepresentations that may include “MERS” (in whatever form), which claim that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. had something to do with negotiating the instrument (the note), which runs contrary to what’s in the assignment, generally.

REASON #2: Personal Knowledge of the Facts … this happens when the expert witness attorney reviews all of your documents.  He can testify as to their factual basis AND render a legal opinion … BOTH under oath and under penalty of perjury as a lawyer!  This is way different than having a so-called “expert” that’s NOT an attorney testify as to anything factual … they can’t give legal opinions; otherwise, in doing so, their testimony could be impeached or effectively diluted under cross examination. Not only that … because the attorney who serves as your expert witness is sitting in the court (prior to giving his testimony), he actually gleans personal knowledge listening to the other side’s attorney further the false and misrepresentative information to the court … for which the damage is immediate (see In re Wilson, U.S. Bkpt Ct E.D. La No 07-11862, Memorandum of Law in Support of the United States Trustee’s Motion for Sanctions against Lender Processing Services, Inc. and the Boles Law Firm), which says:

“Untruthful statements made in bankruptcy proceedings undermine the integrity of the bankruptcy process. The bankruptcy system relies on the candor and accuracy of information presented by all parties, creditors and debtors alike. To ensure candor before this Court and to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy system, this Court should impose on Fidelity and Boles monetary sanctions and other non-monetary relief as this Court deems appropriate pursuant to its inherent authority to sanction abusive litigants coming before the Court, and pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).”  And from the following footnote, No. 16):

“Rule 9011 provides a 20 day “safe harbor” in which a party may withdraw the challenged written representations, unless they are contained in the bankruptcy petition. If the challenged paper is withdrawn, it would not be considered by the court in its decision making process. However, there can be no safe harbor for untruthful statements made in open court, because the harm that results is likely to be immediate.”

(I just told you the Expert Witness Attorney would be there to hear all of the “immediate” misrepresentations.)  This is an actual case where Wells Fargo Bank got hit with a $1.3-million sanction!

This is an attorney, namely, the Bankruptcy Trustee, reporting misconduct! He is telling the other side (through his memorandum, they’ve been given fair warning to recant what they’ve placed into the court record).   If you didn’t catch that so far … let me make sure to clarify this in the following “reason”:

REASON #3: Rule 8.3 – Reporting Professional Misconduct … this is a mandated state bar rule (how many foreclosure defense attorneys actually follow it?)

(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge’s fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.

The foregoing mandates (which is what “shall” means, not “may”) are put there to hold attorneys accountable to report misconduct. What forensic loan auditor or securitization auditor is mandated by the Bar’s own rules to to this?  Come on, think?  Where’s the mandate?

(long pause, heavy sigh)  Come up with one yet? Didn’t think so.

This means that when the expert witness comes into personal knowledge of the facts that the other side’s lawyer has committed felony perjury by making false and misrepresentative statements in open court, he has a mandated duty (for which the State Bar must listen) to report the other lawyer’s misconduct!

This also means that if the judge hearing your case doesn’t give a shit and let’s this scumbag attorney for the bank say whatever he wants and get away with it and hands your property over to the bank AFTER your expert witness attorney advises (through a legal opinion) that the other side’s lawyer, in both pleadings and exhibits and oral statements made, has committed misconduct, not only is the judge exposed and now at risk, but the county he is employed by may also be “on the hook”.

At least bankruptcy judges have the decency to “do the right thing”.  I recently noted the results of the Sundquist ruling in California.  Sundquist-Memo-Opinion

A lot of this depends on how “stacked” your paper trail is and what evidence of misconduct you were able to actually PROVE (not just assert).

EXPOSED RISK FACTORS 

BTW, for those of you “Patriots” out there … a majority of the judges’ oaths of office I’ve seen were actually recorded in the public record in the county they serve in!  This is important to recognize the WHY you’d want a certified copy of their oath of office.   THE PAPER TRAIL!   It’s proof he/she (as a judge) is serving IN THAT COUNTY!

Most counties are self-insured.  The county has either a County Executive or Risk Manager who handles their claims because of something an employee did wrong.  Who would think to tag a judge?   After all, aren’t the judges bonded?   What happens if the bond is attacked, challenged and successfully revoked?   The judge can’t sit on the bench, right?  He will probably be placed on administrative leave while the county investigates what happened.  But that’s not all the county has to worry about.

As a result of the trial or hearing (whether it be evidentiary or just one of those 5-minute “rocket docket” style pieces of crap), there are two other complaints that must be reported … a complaint on the lawyer to the State Bar that can discipline him … and a complaint on the judge to the appropriate judicial authority.  More paper trail to show the County … to give them fair warning that they need to step up or face the consequences!

ALL OF THIS HAS TO BE DONE BY THE EXPERT WITNESS ATTORNEY … WHO IS MANDATED TO “PULL THE TRIGGER”!   PRO SE LITIGANTS (who think they know more than the expert witness attorney) WILL ONLY F**K THIS UP IF THEY TRY TO DO IT THEMSELVES (calling into the county or the bar or the judicial review board and whining about their silly little issues, or filing crap judicial misconduct complaints, which is how the major insurance players in this game will view their cheap efforts to avoid having to pay for an expert witness attorney).  I put this part in the back end of this post as a caveat, because it’s the expert witness attorney who has the “big stick of dynamite with the short fuse” … NOT YOU! 

It gets better … stay tuned for another round of insight into the insurance game in the next segment! The title companies are also in this up to their ears (among other places)!

6 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 3

(OP-ED, first posted: September 1, 2018) —

The writer of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  The author apologizes in advance for the graphic depiction of anything necessary (in the extreme) to shock your conscience into understanding that this is not recommended for you to try on your own. 

At some point in the equation, you are going to have to put your trust in someone that has (at least) studied “the system of things” and understands (basically) where it leads and how to approach it.

AGAIN … DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME!  YOU’VE BEEN WARNED!  I am sharing talking points about a system here, not a boilerplate method where you get to exact revenge.  The following could be your end result if you attempt to do this yourself:

I just recently received a copy of the autopsy of Martin Wirth, a Park County, Colorado resident that was shot to death during an eviction process by the Sheriff’s Department. Another Sheriff’s deputy was shot to death, but after what I read in the autopsy findings, I find it hard to believe that Wirth had anything to do with the deputy’s death. After Waco and Tillman, we know that friendly fire deaths are indeed probable and cannot be ruled out.  In fact, the coroner’s findings were (from the Summary):

The autopsy reveals eleven entrance gunshot wounds involving the full spectrum of the back with a predominance of the mid-back. The autopsy further reveals five exit wounds involving the lower right neck and the mid and upper chest. A sixth exit wound is located in the upper abdomen, in the midline. At the autopsy, three bullets were retrieved outside the body. One bullet is found in the clothing related to the chest; a second bullet is found under the head while removing the clothing; a third bullet is retrieved from the body bag. Two large caliber bullets are recovered from the right and left anterior chest wall. One large caliber bullet remains deeply embedded in the left pelvis. The extensive internal injuries in this case associated with six anterior exit wounds preclude a precise definition of wound tracts.

For those of you who need an explanation, “anterior exit wounds” are sustained as the result of being shot in the back while running away from the gunfire!  How is one able to kill a Sheriff’s deputy while under siege, running out the back door of his home?  We have not heard the whole story. Was there a cover-up?  The news media reported that Wirth shot the deputies as they entered his residence.  They returned fire.  “Wirth died at the scene.”  (media reports)  What scene?  The autopsy said Wirth was found outside of his home on the ground.  How did he get outside (where the coroner’s report said his body was found) if he “died inside” upon return fire of the deputies?  There are a lot of unexplained scenarios here, ones the media can’t hold a candle to.

Based on what history has taught us, Wirth ended up being demonized in the media, just like Randy Weaver and David Koresh.  And let’s not forget Nevada notary Tracy N. Lawrence, who suddenly died of a 3-drug cocktail overdose on the day of her sentencing for one count of notary fraud (she offered to testify against two title officers of LSI Title Agency, Inc.).  Her death was ruled a suicide; however, I know dozens of Texas county clerks that would disagree with that finding because they were presented with those facts at the lecture series I presented to them in 2012. You could see their jaws drop. They were all shaking their head “no”.

You’re probably asking yourself why I intended to post this information.  I bring this up now because of the serious nature of attacking (on your own, because you think you can do better than someone with legal skill, knowledge and a law license) entities outside the scope of your foreclosure case.  I can think of a half dozen people that will ignore my warning here and risk ending up dead or in jail because they won’t listen to reason.  Sometimes I wonder why I even share stuff like this because it’s like giving a baby a stick of dynamite with a short fuse.  What you don’t know could kill you!  Did I scare the shit out of you yet?  You need to understand how serious this stuff is! I don’t know of any other way to emphasize what can happen to you if you self-implement, unless you’d care to Google David Koresh’s autopsy photos to see what an “end result” looks like!

Lest we forget, authorities came in and bulldozed over the “crime scene” at the Mount Carmel “compound”, obliterating any evidence.  A “compound” is defined as a 10′ x 10′ plywood shack (re: Weaver) or the average foreclosure victim’s home (re: Wirth) or the openly multiple-building, communal-style home (re: Branch Davidians).  Take your pick.  What’s behind Door #3?   None of them had fences and razor wire around them, so I have a hard time believing these fit the definition of a “compound”.  Oops!! I forgot.  That’s the term the government uses when it wants to demonize you in the media, so it can get the support of decent, hard-working, taxpaying voters who will support everything they’ve done under suspicious circumstances.

Now let’s get to the sum and substance of “the system of things” …

BONDS AND BONDING

Bonds can come in the form of cash or surety.  I want you to focus on these two and stop thinking about how the counties monetize bail bonds or bonds on their subjects they have detained or arrested.  This has nothing to do with the subject matter, but rather has evolved from Patriot-style behaviors, which I abhor, as this will get you put in jail or worse.

County judges and notaries commissioned by the state (or commonwealth) generally have to have a bond.  Some states do not require a notary bond; thus, the state itself may be held responsible for removing that requirement because a nexus was created when the Secretary of State issued a notary commission to the individual committing the crime (notarizing documents that contain false and misrepresentative information).  If the state doesn’t require a bond, then the notary is acting under the authority of the Secretary of State issuing the commission and thus, we would look to the state to cough up damage money as the result of felony behavior before the court.  What I’m talking about (in brief) here is the idea that bonds can be attacked; however, THIS TOO has to be done properly.  Every “punch line” HAS TO HAVE A “set-up”!

When a cop shoots somebody, what happens?  The cop is generally put on administrative leave while an investigation takes place.  Then a decision is made as to liability (whether the cop should be charged with murder or whether the shooting was justifiable).

What happens when a judge is required to have a bond and tolerates felony behavior in his court?   If someone challenges his bond, he may be placed on administrative leave while an investigation takes place and liability is determined.  There is a right way and a wrong way to even get close to challenging a judge’s bond.  Don’t think that attacking a judge’s bond won’t create statewide attention BECAUSE IT WILL!  Within 24 hours, every court official in the state will know it happened.

PATRIOT-STYLE CRAP

Some people think that filing liens against a judge is cute and that the judge will get his comeuppance.  THIS will get you a jail term, or worse.  I had a COTA workshop attendee do a year and a day for filing a lien against a state judge.  So if you like prison, try doing stupid shit like this!  All filing the lien does is screws up the judge’s credit until necessary measures (which involve spending money) are implemented to delete the lien from the public record.  Filing false liens is a felony in most states.  Please do not call me collect from your jail cell if you act the fool and file one of these liens against a judge because I will not bail you out!  You would be surprised how folks you know well distance themselves from you once you’ve been arrested and jailed!  Let me jog your memory because the State of Missouri just passed a new law (worth the read):

Missouri-2018-HB1769-Enrolled

I don’t know if you picked up on this or not, but Paragraphs 8 & 9 of this new bill appear to provide the framework in Missouri to do a C&E (I have taught this method in previous foreclosure defense workshops).    We do not file any type of liens as part of the process I am talking about here.  We do file a lis pendens.  The suit involves real property.  We have a methodology that requires precision in the creation of a paper trail.  THIS is what gets judges removed from the bench, not your pro se filing of judicial misconduct complaints.  Filing these is also a mistake, because most pro se litigants file them because they didn’t like the judge’s ruling.  Sorry, but that is what the appellate process is for.  I have heard that Patriot-type radio talk show hosts advocate doing this repeatedly to upset the system of things.  Taking that advice will lead you to a 6 x 8 cell with three hots and a cot.  The nature of judicial misconduct is reporting egregious behavior, like condoning felony perjury on behalf of the bank’s counsel.  THAT is what you file judicial misconduct complaints for.  This is why counties, most of whom are self-insured, get nervous when their Risk Managers are approached about this type of subject matter.  DO NOT CONTACT THEM YOURSELF!  We have a method for “getting their attention”!

THE BIGGEST, BADDEST PAPER TRAIL YOU CAN IMAGINE

I cannot stress to you enough that discovery and obtaining documented evidence and employing expert witness affidavits and testimony in the creation of a well-documented paper trail is ESSENTIAL to any success using this plan; otherwise, what do you have worth investigating.  I’ve yet to see a pro se litigant conduct proper discovery, let alone understand rules of civil procedure and rules of evidence to finality in their favor.  A majority of those reading this article won’t even know (if asked outright) what a declaratory judgment action is, let alone a state tort claims action.  The system of things may be overwhelming to many of you, but according to attorneys I’ve spoken with, it’s an eventual Achille’s heel in the system.  One attorney stated, “It’s a game changer!”  When counties don’t have money, they can’t function properly.   Government officials have to answer to voters and the media about the problem created by you, which is why they’ll try to settle before it becomes a 3-ring media circus.

As one attorney put it … you can change things with your vote … or you can change things employing specific tactics against “the system of things”.   I discuss this for educational purposes, because I get so many calls from frustrated foreclosure victims, who don’t know where to turn.  The problem is, the homeowners don’t know how to create the right paper trail.  Hell, I know attorneys that have stopped short of doing the right thing.  Malpractice is also a concern and with the tactics inside “the system of things”, these foreclosure defense attorneys should be worried as well, because “what applies to the goose can be applied to the gander”!

Without “the system of things” in place, we would succumb to financial ruin as a body politic and that could lead to the Civil War that the Rasmussen poll recently talked about.  I am not advocating the use of violence here, just common sense.

More to come about “the system of things” … so you can understand its layout and consequences!

 

6 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

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