Tag Archives: in rem


The author of this post is not giving legal advice, just reporting what’s out there.  You should consult a competent foreclosure defense attorney regarding such matters, as the contents in this post appear to reflect the court’s intolerance for homeowners who file bankruptcy to stop a foreclosure. 

OP-ED — 

Folks who are in trouble with their mortgages in Florida really need to strategize before taking the plunge into the abyss known as the Florida legal system, where state judges clearly have “agendas”, the Florida Legislature has “agendas” and the federal courts have “agendas” … all aimed at taking of property when you can’t make the payments on it.  It’s not often that the author of this post steers away from chain of title issues, but there appears to be widespread ignorance (or in the alternative, intolerance) on the part of the Sunshine State’s legal system, which makes things “not so shiny” anymore, given the recent spate of legislation and court actions.


All one needs to do is examine court dockets to see how fast, over time, that Florida circuit judges have blindly assumed that the financial institutions coming before them actually own the promissory note they’re trying to enforce.  It would seem that judges simply rely on the blatant attack on the property owner as just because otherwise, why would this particular bank show up in court?   Because they can!  And they do!  And judges give them so much leeway that Florida homeowners are stymied for options.  This is why the State of Florida has so many zombie homes (despite what the politicians, economists and the media would have you believe) and shadow inventory that sits empty because of title issues.  In very few cases I’ve examined have I seen evidence within a transcript that allowed for a forensic examination of the note, to make sure it’s “original”, like the bank’s attorney says it is.  To show you that the inequity between state court systems is similar in nature, I’m consulting a case in New Jersey where the bank’s law firm sent a “cover lawyer” into court with what appeared to be a “faxed copy” of the note, claiming it to be the “original”.  I think most judges, even in light of the foreclosure defense attorney’s objections, could tell the difference, but nope … this judge said that the word of the law firm and the faxed copy of what it self-authenticated is good enough!  Can you believe that shit?

Another part of the equation is the existence of foreclosure defense lawyers who have seen fit to turn the foreclosure debacle into a cash cow by using delay tactics to keep property owners in their homes, despite the probable outcome that only about 1 in 25 cases brought into court makes it past the 810-day mark in a Florida foreclosure cycle.  Knowing that the odds are never “in their favor” (attributing the quotation to The Hunger Games), frustrated mortgagors then contemplate using bankruptcy court to dodge the “sale bullet”. However, things in Florida are about to change.


Effective July 1, 2017, Florida homeowners who run to the bankruptcy court and get their promissory note discharged are going to find themselves without other options to fight the foreclosure.  See House Bill 471 here if you don’t believe me: fl-hb-471  It’s only two pages long and I’m sure you can read (if you’re reading this)!

Simply put, any documentation that is filed in Bankruptcy Court which would indicate surrender of the property (commonly seen in Chapter 7 cases) makes it legally okay for the bank’s attorney to submit that document that was filed in the Bankruptcy Court under penalty of perjury to a Florida circuit judge to get a Final Judgment of Foreclosure.  I see this as a definite negative if you’re trying to fight a foreclosure.  But then again, most homeowners are like electricity.  They want to take the path of least resistance; and declaring bankruptcy is certainly a hell of a lot cheaper than fighting a foreclosure through Florida’s appellate system.

It appears that folks don’t understand the difference between an in rem and an in personam action.  Enforcement of a security instrument, which in Florida’s case is a mortgage, can only happen when the party claiming to have an interest in the property can prove ownership.  An attack on the property through the recorded security instrument is an in rem action (like quiet title actions).  This is why I wrote the book The Quiet Title War Manual (with the professional help of California attorney Al West).  The book explains the difference between the note and the mortgage.  Folks who don’t get it should get this book and read it, because when Al West and I taught quiet title workshops, we hammered these basic principles into the heads of the attendees.  In personam actions are actions involving debt, which in this case is the promissory note, NOT the mortgage!   How convenient it is that the Florida legislature has come up with this House Bill in the wake of the recent court conflicts within the federal system!


Let’s look at the case of In re Hookerin-re-hooker   Once you get past the first three paragraphs, you’ll understand why the Florida legislature did what it did to help the banks fight continuous counterattacks in state court.  Again, how convenient, to avoid further confusion in the courts.  Let’s just legislate this away, shall we?

Now we come to the slam dunk that affects the way the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Florida), has ruled that Chapter 7 debtors who file a bankruptcy action and put forth a statement of intention to surrender the real property cannot later contest a foreclosure in the state court. in-re-failla   If you read the first paragraph of this PUBLISHED OPINION, and then read the background on the case, it appears that the homeowners wanted to “have their cake and eat it too”.  The Failla case simply states: “Debtors who surrender property must get out of the creditor’s way.”   The Florida Legislature (I believe) made sure that a bill was passed that shut off the trough at the source of the feed (so to speak).

No more hogs at the trough.  There have been so many different points of view, it’s understandable that the Florida legislature would pass a bill that state courts could point a finger at and say, “SEE?”   So for those of you thinking that running into bankruptcy court (in any state for that matter) and declaring your intent to surrender the property (God forbid, why would you do that?) under penalty of perjury is so confusing to some when their state court cases get shut down.


It has also become relatively apparent that any homeowner that has placed themselves in the foregoing position and continue to litigate their foreclosure in the state courts of Florida are likely to get sanctioned!   Vexatious litigants are likely to wind up in jail on contempt charges!  I say this because of what happened to foreclosure defense attorney Stuart Golant, 70,  in the Palm Beach County courtroom of Senior Judge Howard Harrison for simply making a motion!

Florida homeowners have had the deck stacked against them by the courts and the legislature in favor of the banks when it comes to promissory note enforcement.  Once a mortgage has been recorded in the land records where the subject property is situated, all it takes is a missed payment and the door to “foreclosure hell” opens to swallow the homeowners whole.   I can’t help but wonder what kind of counseling homeowners have received, given the phone calls and emails I get regarding strategizing an in personam case against them.


In a judicial foreclosure state like Florida, a lender comes to court and waves the promissory note around and claims it has the right to enforce the terms of the note!  It should be required to prove that the note is genuine, forensically.  Have the actual paper tested.  Have the ink tested.  Check for pixelation by blowing the note up on a computer screen to examine evidence the note was photoshopped.  Object to the note being entered as the original.  I believe a majority of securitized notes are copies of what was downloaded into the MERS® System and later shredded, as I’ve covered in previous posts.

Once the lender gets the note in front of the court and gets it admitted into evidence and gets the court to agree that U.C.C. Article 3 (Negotiable Instruments) exists and that the alleged lender has the right to enforce the note, THEN the Lender gets to enforce the Security Instrument, the in rem part of the equation.  The security instrument (Mortgage) is then “ripe for the picking”.  Believe it or not, most homeowners think that the lender is foreclosing on the mortgage.  That couldn’t be further from the truth!  The Lender is foreclosing on the Note.  Proving it has the right to enforce the Note means the Lender gets the right to enforce the Security Instrument, not until!

Bankruptcy Courts are designed to handle in personam scenarios.  In personam relates to debt.  Promissory notes are evidence of debt!   Recorded mortgages are evidence of security interests, not debt!   If you’re going to use the bankruptcy court to alleviate your personal obligation to the note, and liquidate it in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, be prepared to move out of your home!

Thinking twice about running into Chapter 7 bankruptcy court to stop the sale?   The “system” is ready for you!   (Hint: This is why we have Chapters 11 and 13!)  No matter, if you live in any state where you think the “deck is stacked” against you, plan your “end game” BEFORE you go into default, not after!

And this is why I don’t talk about in personam issues much.  Homeowners really should get a financial education before they sit down at the closing table.

Tune into kdwradio.com every Friday night at 6:00 p.m. EST for my radio show, City Spotlight: Special Edition!   Order any of the author’s books by visiting Clouded Titles!

For those of you waiting for the new FDCPA book, it’s almost ready!   Pre-order your copy today!  (FDCPA actions are for dealing with debt collectors!)


Filed under Financial Education, Op-Ed Piece


The following post is an op-ed piece by the author and does not constitute legal advice. 

You know when the state “rank and file” are in control because things get “political” when property owners turn up the heat and they end up suffering for it in the end.  In this instance, I turn to Washington State.  I thought there was some promise to being a property owner in the “Evergreen State” but now I’m not so sure.  Between the politicos there and the rank and file that control things (and I’m talking about the state’s justice and legislative arms) there, those in power certainly appear to be manipulated by bank money and banking interests.  It is sad when the electorate doesn’t understand that they are doing a grave disservice to those that put them in office when they allow the same nonsense over property ownership to continue.  Part of property ownership is the right to defend your property.  Being denied access to justice because you don’t have a “war chest” to fight with forces people to have to resort to pro se tactics, or even less desirable, to seek out those who are non-lawyers who charge fees for advice that might be considered by the “rank and file” as unauthorized practice of law.

To that end, the power arm of the law, the Washington State Bar Association (who by the way took my $50 and didn’t respond to my request to do a CLE for attorneys there on property law), is having its own set of issues to deal with, when the state’s UPL committee members all jumped ship, as reflected in the following post:

Board members quit, blast Washington State Bar in fight over UPL, legal technicians

When you read articles like this, it makes you wonder what exactly the Attorney General’s office is doing to prevent Washington property owners from getting justice.  One only has to look deeper to find out there’s a letter floating around that explains WSBA “politics” and it’s not pretty:


On top of that, the politics of the Seattle City Auditor’s audit (conducted by Marie McDonnell) is now being “diluted” by MERS.  MERSCORP CEO Bill Beckman (one of the named targets in the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION) wrote a letter to the City Auditor of Seattle in an attempt to explain away the legalities of what the Washington Supreme Court didn’t rule on, which gives MERS the legal right to continue to commit what I consider to be criminal RICO-style behavior in giving MERSCORP members unfettered privileges to “doctor up” assignments in the name of MERS, continuing to treat MERS as if it’s a beneficiary (with some beneficial interest in property) after the Supremes ruled in the Bain decision that MERS is NOT a valid beneficiary under the Washington Deed of Trust Act.  See the letter below:

SEA000958 Letter from MERS 3-27-2015

Notice how things are critically quiet in Florida after the Forensic Examination made its way to DC?  I still want my day in front of the grand jury to explain the way things really are … the letter Beckman wrote to Seattle might as well have been worded with the headline, “How to Steal People’s Homes for Fun and Profit by using the MERS® System as a Document Manufacturing Tool”.   This is what MERSCORP members are doing to every county in America, not just in Washington State.  If there wasn’t a glitch, why then is there now a mers_rider in effect in Washington (Oregon and Montana), states who have struck out against MERSCORP in their respective courts?   This is what led me to believe that the entire “audit” process was going to cause internal conflict that was going to spill over into the body politic.

I could bitch about the fact that the bid specifications (within the RFP) that the City Auditor’s office put out called for whoever won the bid to make a personal appearance to explain their findings that wasn’t adhered to by city council, but I won’t.  The results would have been the same.  MERSCORP would still be trying to finesse their way around the real issues like they always do, attempting to add credence to their business model, making excuses why they can’t communicate with Montgomery County’s “witness”.  Is there a conflict there?   Not sure I want to even address this, because now, the entire debacle has gone political.

I have largely contended that if you put a robosigner and their notary in front of a grand jury, they will squeal like pigs and tell the grand jury that they were ordered by their bosses to sign these assignments (that MERS is attempting to whitewash in the letter you’ve probably read that brought vomit halfway up your esophageal tract by now) that “created” standing for their client to foreclose.  It is hard fighting this uphill battle when the system has been custom-tailored for the banks.

This is where MERS and the Washington State Bar Association’s Practice of Law Committee have (in my book) caused homeowners’ rights to grind to a minimum, if not a virtual halt.  Check out the front of their website (which I provided you with here in .pdf format):

Practice of Law Board

I could probably count the number of homeowners on one hand that have been actually “helped” by this.  If this wasn’t the case, why are there so many homeowners resorting to using non-lawyers to help them “fight the good fight”?  Because they’re being denied decent representation (and legal help) elsewhere.   Any law firm that does good for the people (like Stafne-Trumbull) gets attacked by the AG’s office and the WSBA, because the rank and file in the AG’s office include former foreclosure mill attorneys with an apparent axe to grind.  This is what has exacerbated Washington State property owners.

Here’s another dilemma: CONSTRUCTIVE NOTICE!

When a borrower goes to closing, they sign a mortgage (deed of trust) as the Security Instrument … and a Note.  The Note creates the obligation and the Security Instrument collateralizes the property.  The Note isn’t recorded in the public record. The Security Instrument is recorded.  The Note is in personam.  The Security Instrument is in rem.  If you have not figured out the difference between these two documents yet, you should not have bought the house in the first place!

When you went to the closing table, you might have signed a security instrument that contained the name MERS in it.  If that’s the case, you’ve already got “issues” with your chain of title, because you didn’t get constructive notice as to:

  1. Who is MERS, really?  Did you as the Borrower fully understand that you were giving MERS rights that would eventually be brought into question in the courts as to whether MERS is a real “beneficiary”?
  2. Was there ever a recorded document that established the agency relationship between MERS and the “Lender” of record?  Unfortunately, there is no public record of that (at least I haven’t found one). So then, what actually did you agree to, since the “agency relationship/nominee status” was established BEFORE you signed on the dotted line?
  3. How can you perfect an already-established “agency relationship” between MERS and your Lender? At least when you sign a “master form mortgage” or “fictitious deed of trust”, which are protected under statute, you at least know there’s reference document establishing certain covenants that you and the lender agreed to.  Well, the MERS agreement isn’t one of them!  There is no “master form MERS agreement” (at least not one I can find)!
  4. Normally, when agency is designated, there is a recorded power of attorney BEFORE the act takes place!  Now go find me a MERSCORP power of attorney in your land records that completely explains the relationship promulgated by the MERSCORP executory contracts with its lenders in any instance (including any agreement like the ETA_Warehouse_Template_v6) wherein the Borrower had constructive notice that MERS was usurping the county land records with its own privatized database, and I promise I will post it on line and print a retraction to this op-ed piece’s portion where I rip MERS a “new one” for concealing its business model from the Borrower, who had no idea his loan funds were actually coming from Wall Street “suckers” … uh, er, investors, who gave up a lot of their pensions to fund all the blow, booze and hookers that Wall Street executives feasted on post-2008 crash.
  5. Besides, HOW is it that YOU as a Borrower can approve a deal that was struck BEFORE you went to the closing table? You didn’t have notice of that, did you?

I can’t wait for The Big Short movie to come out in December!  I bet the movie doesn’t address the foregoing scenario though, but you can still see the trailer here (it’s pretty cool):  The Big Short Trailer

If the foregoing scenario was actually presented to a criminal grand jury however, I think you’d see some indictments.

Isn’t it nice to finally figure out that your note might have been fractionalized into 35 pieces, sold off to 35 different investment groups, and there’s not a damned thing the courts will do about it … at least for now?

On the other hand, follow the Wolf v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. case in the 151st District Court in Houston, Texas.  We’re expecting to see the jury award against Wells Fargo in that case (for manufacturing phony documents to prove standing … remember that 150-page manual that was floating around out there that New York bankruptcy attorney Linda Tirelli brought to the attention of the court there), $5,000,000 in punitive damages!  You can expect they’ll try to appeal that. Still, a good case that has some promise.

The prosecution of these issues has not gone far enough.  We’ll see what the DC machine does next, since they’ve promised they’re going after “individuals” who caused the 2008 crash.

1 Comment

Filed under Breaking News, Financial Education


As we look ahead to 2015, it is important to recognize why I put together a “second phase” of training in something that will be vitally important for future generations.  The Quiet Title Workshops I am planning for 2015 will offer a scope of training not available in the COTA Workshops.  Here are the three major differences between the two:

1. The COTA Workshop gives you the basic core of information necessary to build a foundation of knowledge into the real issues concerning real property.  The Quiet Title Workshop puts the actual framework of not only the knowledge, but the real life tools in your hands to mold and shape to your case to your particular needs.

2. The COTA Workshop presents you with the legal theorem to understand how we got into this mess.  The Quiet Title Workshop presents you with the necessary steps and analysis in framing your particular arguments out of the theorem taught in the COTA Workshop.

3. The COTA Workshop illustrates HOW and WHY the chain of title is important and provides arguendo necessary to deraign title.  The Quiet Title Workshop takes this information a step further, to apply the arguendo and deraignment information in a format useful to your particular cause of action.

What you do with this information once you’ve got it is up to you.

Because of the fact that most people can only soak up so much information in a such a short period of time also means that it becomes necessary to take the time to research what you’ve committed to “soaking up” so you can utilize that information for case development.  The stuff we will be teaching in the Quiet Title Workshop will cover some of what was discussed in the COTA Workshop, but takes it a step further to show you … in a serious, hands-on manner … how to apply that information in such a way as to educate the judge and opposing counsel, because it’s obvious they either don’t or understand the real purpose of a quiet title action or they do know it but they are in denial that it applies to your given situation because it works counterproductive to their purposes.

Yes folks … the banks are out to continue the biggest land grab in American history.  We all know it.  It doesn’t take a conspiracy theorist attitude to figure this out.

So, to give you a sneak preview … here’s some of what you’ll learn in this Workshop:

1. The basics of legal theorem involved in case development for putting a quiet title complaint together.

2. Why it is fundamentally necessary to keep your quiet title action in state court.

3. Given sets of strategies necessary to evaluate WHAT information you should put into your quiet title action.

4. Given sets of strategies for the purposes of analysis as to WHO your quiet title complaint should list as Defendant/Claimants.

5. The use of deraignment of title in your pleadings and why it is fundamentally important to your case.

6. Necessary counter-strategies to combat issues involving MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.).

7. Discussion of issues involving removal of your case to federal court and the use of remand motions to take it back to state court.

8. Why it is fundamentally important to utilize a motion for declaratory relief in your Complaint.

9. Why MERS is just the “pizza delivery guy”!   (Quoting Al West, our attorney guest lecturer, who will go into further detail about arguing a quiet title action!)

1o. What the fundamental differences are between in rem and quasi in rem quiet title actions.

PLUS, you’ll get a USB flash drive specific to Quiet Title actions, coupled with declaratory judgment information and actual pleadings for reference.

Because of our hectic schedules, the number of workshops we will host in 2o15 are few; thus, if you or someone you know is in dire need of this information, we suggest you pass it along to them and refer them to the Clouded Titles website to sign up and register.  Copy and paste this post in an email to them.  Due to the intensive nature of the material we are covering in class, seating is limited.  It is also suggested you bring a laptop to this event that supports a USB flash drive, as you will be opening actual case files in class, including templates provided for your fundamental understanding of case development.  If you have an attorney, they should probably attend this class with you or in your stead.   We will be offering a few CLE classes in 2015; however, many of you are still trying to find attorneys that have some sort of knowledge of this subject matter because you understand that most attorneys don’t like quiet title actions because it involves a FINITE END to the dilemma and a FINITE END means no more collecting of legal fees.  This too is a misconception because as long as MERS is in existence, there is always a chance that it and its parent (MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.) and its users could potentially and legally interfere in your chain of title.

It is my wish to see all of the MERSCORP and MERS Board of Directors put in prison for conspiracy to run a criminal enterprise as there is substantial proof that the users of the “MERS® System” deliberately and purposefully ignore MERS’s own Rules of Membership and continue to commit blatant fraud on the land records of every single county in America.  The “MERS® System” provides their “legal excuse” for what they do to violate MERS’s own policies and misrepresent MERS in every single court case they’re involved in.

Therefore, it is vitally important that if wish to continue to “fight the good fight”, you arm yourself with knowledge, no matter what.  It is rare that we have someone who has won quiet title actions (including myself) with a bar license to teach the fundamentals and strategic components necessary to aid you in your quest for the truth!   The courts in this country need to be educated and be specifically made to understand what is right and what is wrong with this picture when it comes to why quiet title actions will become fundamentally necessary to reclaim what has been woefully distorted by this system that is called MERS.

We wish you the best in 2015 in your pursuit of justice and look forward to seeing you at these events.

FYI … those of you wishing to fax in your registration forms may fax them to 1-866-757-4661.


Filed under Breaking News, Chain of Title Education, Financial Education

Misconceptions about Property Ownership: Part III

In this last segment, I want to touch on recorded assignments (or the lack thereof) and what that means for potentially quieting the title to your property.  I speak of this from a paralegal’s point of view.  If you have an issue with my thought process, you are certainly encouraged to toss these ideas out to a competent foreclosure defense attorney and get his take on it!  I would recommend someone who has actually succeeded in doing a full-blown quiet title action in the quasi in rem realm.

I speak of this process in the sense that in today’s times, with the advent of this so-called “agent place card business model”, the Lenders get to screw over every county recorder and register of deeds by not recording assignments after the original Lender sells the promissory note. This, in effect, has turned the entire quiet title process into a quasi in rem scenario in favor of the homeowner and against the place card agent and any future lender touching its business model.

First … the just desserts …

The problem with the state legislatures is that many of them succumbed to taking “private donations” by the bank lobbyists in exchange for passing legislation to allow “place card agents” to enter into the system with a business model that is proving itself to be full of flaws.  The arrogance of it all, right?

I hope every single one of those legislators out there that voted for this piece of crap business model end up with their titles (to their own properties) so screwed up they won’t ever be able to sell them without having to go through what we’re all going through!  (*sigh*)

I know, I know … why am I so cruel?   Why am I coming down on the blind electorate?

If you had to spend tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees fighting a foreclosure against a lender who you knew didn’t have the note, you’d be cheering at your computer right now!   These legislators gave this business model the impetus to operate in all 50 states and the courts seemingly turned a blind eye to the whole affair based on the misrepresentations of the attorneys representing the “agent”.   All I have to do is point to the behaviors of the foreclosure mill law firms who come in with “new and improved” assignments to bolster their claims and believe that they actually can hoodwink a judge into believing the assignment is legitimate! The agent’s attorneys must think the judges are really stupid, huh?

Further, the county recorders and registers of deeds have been filing suit against this “agent” to no avail.  There are only a handful of law suits left at this point (by county officials) that are still in play.  The elected county recordkeepers are losing because they are suing the agent.   Not only does the agent “wear the emperor’s clothes” … the agent has no money.  The agent’s attorneys tell the judge that the judgment-proof agent gets to do whatever it wants because it claims it’s a party by contract.  Seemingly, the agent has gained ground … but for every suit it wins, it loses another.

But what happens when you’ve been regularly paying your mortgage loan and you know that the “agent” is involved?   Would it surprise you to know that your loan was sold multiple times BEFORE you even signed the note and mortgage at closing?   That’s the way this “agent’s game” is played folks!  Off the record!

This is where the fallacy of this business model comes in. 

For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

In many instances, the original lender went belly-up after making thousands of predatory, subprime mortgage loans.  The way these sham lenders were set up was by design.  So let’s just (for the sake of thought and not ordering you to act on these ideas) think on the following:

Besides the obvious solution (which would be walking away from these types of so-called “agent-based mortgage loans”) is to take on the belly-up lender and see if he shows up in court.  After all, its agent can’t have assets because having assets would violate its corporate charter, right?  If the agent is bankruptcy-remote, that means it has no assets or liabilities, so it can’t be a candidate for reorganization really.  If it’s just an agent, why would it need to be sued?  It is only on record as an agent, right?   Not a lender, right?

However, its parent is a money-making entity that hauls in over $2.5-billion annually in revenue and it now reports to 5 federal agencies in lieu of a consent order (April 13, 2011)  that states the agent must tell these federal agencies: (1) which one of its clients is being sued at any given moment; (2) whether someone is suing the agent or the agent’s parent itself; and (3) how much money it has in its war chest to fight these lawsuits.  The average person on the street would see this as the “government circling the wagons” in favor of a private corporation that is not statutorily regulated, statutorily mandated or internally monitored to detect what shenanigans the agent and its parent are up to.   When you look at the bigger picture though, the current U. S. Attorney General seems to be protecting the agent and its parent because he worked at the DC law firm that represents the agent and its parent.  Talk about the government being in bed with private enterprise?

The fact that the “agent” has gotten away with so many court decisions tells this author that: (1) this has fostered arrogance among the agent, its alleged “members” and its counsel; (2) that the agent and its counsel are going to let this arrogance rule its decisions to appeal certain cases;  and (3) that if the agent is only an agent and has no personal “interest” in the property (especially YOUR property), why should it be included in the suit to quiet title at all?  Many attorneys I’ve spoken with that have launched successful quiet title actions agree.  “No recorded assignment” may be wonderful for the lender saving money during the life of the transaction in recordation fees; however, with no recorded assignment, three (3) things happen:

(1) There is an obvious concern that unknown intervening assignees have permeated the property’s chain of title; thus, these mesne assignees became unknown defendant-claimants who must be served by publication;

(2) The original lender probably sold the note into the agent’s so-called “system” and no longer has an interest in the note (has been paid in full on the note) and thus will probably disclaim its interest anyway (if you could manage to serve it with process); and

(3) Whoever the real party in interest is has no perfected, recorded interest constructively noticing the world of its lien right (because it’s hiding somewhere within the confines of the sinister agent provocateur’s database).  The lender has been told by the agent that its (the agent’s) business model allows it to save money by screwing county recorders out of their recording fees.

Thus, with no real lender “of record” … and the original lender gone bust … there’s no one else to serve with process (outside of the Secretary of State where the original lender used to hang its corporate charter).  Thus, the quiet title action would appear to run its legal course without challenge to TITLE!  Any agent attorney attempting to challenge it later would never get a do-over (at least that what some of these cases already adjudicated appear to indicate).

Why anyone would even reason that this agent should “have its cake and eat it too” is beyond me!  It’s a private corporation for God’s sake!  It was founded and run by other private corporations who are in business for one thing and one thing only:


For the agent, it’s all about: (1) making money; and (2) helping lenders who don’t have a provable interest in the loan steal people’s homes by obfuscating the chain of title and using inter-agent processes to hide their real activities and dummy up documents to bolster their phony claims!

When the agent’s “player” wishes to “update” the chain of title, they simply record an assignment (when they’re about to foreclose) and we’re all just supposed to believe that the “place card” preserves the agent’s contended interest in this folly of a business model.   I know of at least a dozen cases where this business model has either been taken to task and lost … or every one that it didn’t challenge was left out in the cold and the title was quieted.  It appears this QT model is fine-tuning itself and there’s not a damned thing the agent can do about it, especially if 250,000+ dutifully-paying mortgaged homeowners take action before there is even a foreclosure or a default in their payments … and thus … no recorded assignment exists!

Imagine what life in America would be like with 250,000 quiet title lawsuits all being filed at the same time … every month?

This is what the U. S. judicial system gets to entertain in exchange for giving the “agent” (provocateur) the opportunity to screw with the real property records of over 3,000+ counties in the United States of America … and get away with it.  With that, I make three key points here:

(1) For every securitized mortgage loan, there appears to be a deficient chain of title.  The solution?  A chain of title assessment (COTA)!  The COTA digs deep into the players and formulates issues for attorneys to consider when filing the suit to quiet title (who to consider serving and who NOT to consider serving with process).  With enough issues present (accompanied by enough decent case law), it makes it easier to read “the full story” of how the chain of title developed over time, or didn’t.  Many competent QT attorneys rely on the COTA to win their cases!

(2) For every securitized mortgage loan, unless there’s a pending foreclosure, there’s no recorded assignment … thus, in most cases, the chain of title is disrupted at the point of the originating lender.  With no recorded assignment, who is the homeowner supposed to serve with process?   If the originating lender has gone belly-up, how can there be an agency relationship with an agent?  The real question is … why bother serving the agent when the originating party-in-interest isn’t there to create the agency relationship that this whole scheme relied on in the first place?

(3) For every securitized mortgage loan, a quiet title action does not challenge the NOTE or the chain of custody thereof … the quiet title action challenges title to the Property and who owns it … YOU or the agent?  In other words, where is the agent’s name on your title in the real property records of the county your property is located in?  If the agent owns anything, it violates its corporate charter.  It’s bankruptcy-remote, right?  Thus, what “interest” can it have in your title?

Could the agent’s claim to hold legal title be held to some standard of liability?  Could the agent’s claim to hold legal title represent a tangible interest that gives the agent the right to represent itself for unknown assignees that aren’t present in the land records?  I think not … but that’s my take on it!

I’ll tell you one thing … New York Bankruptcy Judge Robert Grossman (in his original ruling in In Re Agard) was not wrong about what he wrote about the “agent” in his order.  The emperor has no clothes!  The arrogance of it all, right?

Let the agent sue?  It has all this money, right?  I personally don’t believe there are enough foreclosure mill attorneys out there versed in defending that many quiet title actions at once, do you?  Hmmm … 250,000 quiet title actions a month couldn’t be all that bad for the economy, could they?

If the courts don’t allow quiet title actions, do you think that would be a precursor for anarchy?   Then let the games begin!  Let it start with a COTA!   Read Clouded Titles for more information!


Filed under Breaking News