Tag Archives: Limited Power of Attorney

UPDATE: BRUCE JACOBS IS FIGHTING BANK OF AMERICA!

UPDATE FROM MIAMI —

Miami-Dade Judge Bronwyn Miller has rejected attorney Bruce Jacobs’ demands that Bank of America be sanctioned for withholding and destroying records … 1.8-billion of them!  There was no specific reason given for the Judge’s decision.  Bank of America (of course) argues that Jacobs’ claims were baseless.

Jacobs had accused the bank of purging the records while under a court-ordered subpoena (in another foreclosure case) to hide evidence of alleged fraud because the original records may have been altered.  Bank of America responded by stating that the records were copied by an outside firm and returned to the bank and that it was the “outside firm’s copies that were purged”.  Bank of America’s attorney stated that Jacobs’ claims were not relevant to this matter because they were based on claims from another case raised in bankruptcy court.  (See the article below for clarification!)

 

See the following link:

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/10/11/bank-of-america-fights-court-battle-over-purge-of-nearly-2-billion-bank-records.html

NOTE:  Bruce has asked me to repost this!

OP-ED — It is not surprising that the individual documents involved in the particular case are not a part of the scrutiny involved here.  Anyone reading any “manufactured” Bank of America document could understand that in (for a time) in Simi Valley, California, tens of thousands of so-called fraudulent assignments of both mortgages and deeds of trust were created under the direction of Bank of America in order to create standing so it could foreclose on affected homeowners.  Many of these documents contained “CoreLogic” on them.  We know from a certain interview with a former contract worker at Simi Valley (in the document manufacturing plant there) that he was signing documents as a Vice President of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and he didn’t even know who MERS was.  Documents were always referenced back to CoreLogic in Chapin, South Carolina.  Remember the LPS debacle?

Title companies and document processing plants that go out of their way to create documents (or be involved in the creation of them) are NOT your friend!

Many of these documents claim that Bank of America, NA ended up with (as an assignee, or transferred to another party as an assignor) an assignment of mortgage or deed of trust as the result of a merger involving “BAC Home Loans Servicing LP fka Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP”, which we have researched thoroughly and found to be false, as Countrywide Home Loans, Inc. was not directly subsumed into Bank of America, N.A.   Oops!  We forgot Red Oak Capital and another merger entity.  The point being … if the other side is going to claim that it acquired something by merger … don’t you think it’s necessary to make them prove it?   We take too much of this for granted and don’t recognize when something is that obvious that we “forget” to challenge it. Every state in the U.S. has a civil component for attacking fraudulent documents.  Why is no one using them to their fullest extent?

Of the documents we now find worthy of discovery: (a.) all assignments in the chain of title; (b.) limited powers of attorney recorded for the benefit of the assignee (Grantee); and (c.) agency and/or merger agreements.  The Grantee (or Assignee) of an agency relationship cannot prove that relationship.  It must be legally proven by the Grantor (or Assignor) of the relationship!  For example … how can a Borrower “agree” that an agency relationship between Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. exists on a mortgage or deed of trust when the Borrower has no proof or personal knowledge of such?

This is why homeowners should regard anything involving “MERS” as suspect and (as we suggest) … walk away from the closing table!  It’s bad enough that over 80-million homes have issues involving their chains of title because of MERS and yet people keep going to the closing table and signing these documents without reading them because they just want the damned keys to the house, whether it financially and psychologically affects them in the future!

This is why we see increased bankruptcy filings, suicides and murder-suicides related to foreclosure cases all over America!  There are portfolio lenders (like fsnb.com) out there … why aren’t we using them instead?   And now another round of subprime mortgages has hit the national marketplace and people who got into trouble in Round One are the first ones standing in line for Round Two.  When will we learn that those who are ignorant of history are condemned to repeat it?

In my next post, I’m going to present a 5th U.S. Circuit case where a REMIC won because of a homeowner’s failure to properly attack his case!  This case involves not one but TWO Assignments of Deed of Trust that were not only servicer “manufactured” but recorded in “reverse”, which would appear to have negated the effectiveness of BOTH of them!  You be the judge!

3 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 5

(OP-ED, first posted: September 7, 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.

Now comes the fun part!

It’s not the punch line … it’s the back end of the set-up!

This is where risk aversion and the filing of claims are twained!

JURISDICTION

When a real estate brokerage, title company, document mill or law firm is created, incorporated or organized by statute (an LLC, an LP, an LLP, a PA, a PC, etc.), these are statutory creatures of the state they are formed, organized or incorporated in.  This means the state has jurisdiction over the  “misbehaviors” of these entities and the agents-representatives-employees who represent them.  Someone has to answer to somebody for something!

In a law firm, there are named partners, of which one of them is a managing partner or supervising attorney.  That person generally is the contact person for not only service of process (can act as the Registered Agent or is in contact with the Registered Agent) but is also the individual that is named as the contact person for the firm’s errors and omissions (“E & O”) insurance.  Law firm E & O insurance costs are hefty, depending on the number of attorneys, partners, etc. to be insured.  It is implied here that each participating attorney has: (1) an education in law; (2) has passed the state bar exam; and (3) has applied for and received a license to practice law in that state for which he or she sat for the state bar in.  Whether the attorney is a novice or a seasoned veteran, each attorney has to pass muster for moral turpitude and character before getting licensed.  The state bars are generally the policing agency responsible for disciplining attorneys when they do something egregious or violate any of the Rules of Professional Conduct.  In short, everyone in the law firm, including the partners and the supervisory attorneys are liable and held responsible by the disciplinary agency that governs their behaviors, namely, the state bar’s disciplinary committee.  These committees are generally off-shoots of the judicial system of things in each state.   The behaviors of lawyers are regulated by the states they practice in, so each state’s Supreme Court decides whether they practice law in their respective states or not.  The supervising attorney is also responsible for the behaviors of all of the “non-lawyers” working in the firm.  The foregoing is a restatement for insurance purposes … we’ll get to that in a moment.

UPL: THE UNAUTHORIZED PRACTICE OF LAW

Each state bar also has an Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee, which generally is an organized group of “henchmen” that investigate matters of relevance when non-lawyers either: (a.) attempt to represent paying clients as attorneys or advocates; and (b.) practice law, which is a statutorily-prescribed and heavily-regulated profession.  Part of the problem with today’s society is that even though attorneys have to go through a lot of schooling and testing and licensing, a lot of the body politic doesn’t trust them.  There have been numerous instances where malpractice has been committed and thus, a lot of attorneys have made a bad name for the profession.  People don’t even trust the profession as a whole, because many state bar associations don’t discipline their misbehaving lawyers enough or to the degree that it satisfies the desires of the body politic.  This is why non-lawyers have jumped into the legal fray.  In real property law, lawyers are tasked with document review to make sure that everything contained within a document is legally sound.  Because of the unveiling of illegitimate processes conducted by servicers and their lackeys in creating phony documents, everyone thinks they know how to read, analyze, interpret and determine various causes of action that will fall right in line with getting a paycheck equal to or better than a practicing lawyer. Promoting oneself as having the ability to review documents and give opinions about what’s in them had better have been followed with “J.D.” and “Esq.” (yes, I know, it’s a title of nobility … let’s not go there!); otherwise, the UPL Committee steps in when they become aware of the practice.  You see, in the legal system, the UPL Committees were set up to protect the paychecks of attorneys and not the paychecks of non-lawyers!  Most non-lawyer violators (for UPL) get ONE warning.  If they keep doing what they were warned ONCE NOT TO DO, then felony charges are filed against them and they are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.  The foregoing is a restatement for insurance purposes … we’ll get to that in a moment.

FORECLOSURE COURT JUDGES

This body of “lawyers” have either been elected or appointed to serve on the bench because they have demonstrated the capacity in the understanding of the rules of civil procedure, the rules of criminal procedure, the rules of evidence and generally, the body of law that accompanies the field they serve as judges in.  For the purposes of this article, I focus on the state judges and NOT federal (as they are appointed for life) because state judges are generally elected and thus responsible to voters and constituents alike.  They are also responsible to the county they serve in while on the bench and hold themselves out as “employees” of the county, with the privilege of sovereign immunity from the decisions they make.  These judges also have a Code of Conduct (or Judicial Canons) which they must abide by.  In Florida, for example, when a judge is suspected of committing an infraction that harms the public or specific persons within the cases he or she rules upon in the process of presiding over a case, that judge can be brought up on disciplinary charges before the Judicial Qualifications Commission (the “JQC”).  Every state has some sort of judicial disciplinary committee, even though they may have different names.  The Supreme Courts of each state can also determine whether a judge remains on the bench, based on their behaviors or the lack thereof, albeit in their consideration of the recommendations of the judicial disciplinary committee.

EXPOSURE AND RISK

We now come to the part about how “state statutes” play into the mix.  Virtually every state has “fraudulent document statutes”.  Some have less severe penalties than others. I put them all into The Quiet Title War Manual under “state-specific resources”, which took up half the book, explaining in three paragraphs on actionable offenses in each state regarding the recording of false documents.

In Florida, for example, the state legislature enacted the Florida Criminal Code § 817.535, which makes it a third-degree felony to record a document known to contain false and misrepresentative statements for the purposes (intent) to steal the property (by and through the foreclosure process) … PLUS … a fine equal to the market value of the home!  Missouri just recently passed a similar statute, which also allows for doing a Cancellation & Expungement action to clear title of bogus assignments and other related documents.

Interestingly enough, the foregoing Florida statute also has a “civil component”.  This is equally important to understand, as the statute is interchangeable in concept, yet its meaning is clear … you record a phony document in order to create standing and further rely on it in court, you’re in trouble!  This puts everyone whose name appears in the recorded assignment at risk. The subsequent filing of foreclosure complaint pleadings, which rely on false and misrepresentative statements in order to claim the right to foreclose, put the actors within the document at legal risk.  Once the “assignment” itself (containing the false and misrepresentative information) is recorded, other documents can then be challenged based on the falsity of the information contained in the assignments, such as: (a.) Appointments of Substitute Trustee; (b.) Affidavits of Lost Note; and (c.) Notice of Default and Sale.  Post-foreclosure, any transfer in title through Trustee’s Deeds or Clerk’s Deeds can also be challenged, predicated on the falsity of the statements contained within the assignment that was manufactured in order to create standing.

The county clerks are immune from suits in the removal of phony documents, as they are generally mandated by statute to record what is given to them, as long as it contains all of the elements of a proper recording (according to statute).  Still, John O’Brien, the Register of Deeds from Southern Essex District in Massachusetts, will not record documents that contain the name of known robosigners.  Some states’ clerks will turn over suspicious documents to their local DA’s for review before recording.  This still does not absolve the wrongdoing if the documents contain false and misrepresentative information.

This is not the part where you read the foregoing and get mad.  This is the part where you get “clarity”.  It’s all about the assignments!   It’s always been about the assignments!  Any attorney, trustee, auctioneer or any law firm or title company attempting to transfer title as the result of either a judicial or non-judicial foreclosure has EXPOSURE and thus, inherent RISK of being attacked (“called on the carpet”) and held liable! These types of behaviors are what insurance companies are trying to avoid!

To finalize this section of my work, let’s posit for a moment that the attorney brought this assignment up in court (or attached it to his pleadings as an Exhibit) and got the court to rely on it’s validity, even though the other side brought in an expert witness attorney who testified as to the falsity of the document’s contents and the judge ignored the expert attorney’s testimony and awarded the property to the bank anyway.  Let’s also include that fact that most of the time, it’s the mortgage loan servicer that is claiming to have authority to foreclose on behalf of the lender, with no Limited Power of Attorney (“LPOA”) to show for it.  This document can also be challenged, because these documents are restrictive in nature and many times, there’s noting in the LPOA that allows the servicer to foreclose (but do everything else, which increases its exposure as well).

Everyone in the foregoing scenario has to answer to a higher authority   There are title companies out there who help the banks foreclose on real property and they get to answer to the State Department of Insurance.  Mortgage loan servicers have to be licensed and bonded and have to answer to the Department of Banking and Finance.  If this wasn’t so, Fidelity National Financial wouldn’t have been so quick to “spin off” Lender Processing Services when the SHTF post-financial collapse of 2008 and DOCX became a 3-ring media circus, resulting in the prosecution and imprisonment of Lorraine M. Brown, it’s principal.

It is at this point that we start to create the biggest, baddest paper trail imaginable … and I will explain that paper trail in my next segment … stay tuned!!

 

 

8 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

SECOND FDCPA WEBINAR FEATURES ACTION AGAINST OCWEN!

BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED — UPDATE (JUNE 19, 2017)

The uniqueness of “kicking someone when they’re down” doesn’t even come to mind here, even in light of the dilemma I created for myself when I delivered a copy of the two-volume, 778-page OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION to the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Armando Ramirez on December 30, 2014.

This is one of the reasons why bad press is still “press”.  Maybe Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC is delighting in all of this unwanted attention.   As of today, it’s stock is still trading.  I wish I’d have known in advance of the issues confronting the mortgage loan servicer would come to a head on April 20, 2017, as I would have seriously shorted Ocwen’s stock and made thousands of dollars doing it.  Darn!

However, given the issues surrounding Ocwen’s reliance on one of its affiliates, Altisource (headquartered conveniently in Luxembourg) and Ocwen’s REALServicing platform, you can bet that there’s a good chance that any time Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC sends you a Monthly Mortgage Statement, it’s riddled with accounting errors.

Significantly, these errors can result in demands for payment which are erroneous and subject to civil liability under the FDCPA.  If you are actually paying Ocwen money for these errors, based on these statements, later discovering you overpaid or your payments were misapplied to someone else’s account to make up for Ocwen’s accounting shortfalls, this could warrant a case for disgorgement.

I find it incredibly interesting that Ocwen Loan Servicing’s “Sweet 16” (who I call the Florida notaries who sat around a table in West Palm Beach, Florida and took turns “dummying up” documents that would be recorded in real property records all over the United States, further creating issues of clouds on titles to millions of pieces of real property all over America.

Turning to a recent post on this blog, I note that Ocwen’s “Contract Managers” and “Contract Coordinators” have that same ability to “dummy up” affidavits that claim Ocwen has the authority to do “this, that and the other”; however, without a Limited Power of Attorney to back up the significant claims that Ocwen employees make on these affidavits, one would be virtually in the dark on what actual authority Ocwen has to do anything.

RESEARCH NOTES:

(1) You can locate all of Ocwen’s Limited Powers of Attorney (“LPOA”)by going to the Palm Beach County, Florida Clerk of Court’s website and searching for “Power of Attorney (POA)” with Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC as the GRANTEE.

(2) You need to reach every single detail of these powers of attorney when you locate the appropriate one, as there are over 800 of them recorded in the Clerk’s database.  Use the GRANTOR name to isolate your search (e.g., Bank of New York Mellon, U.S. Bank, HSBC Bank USA, N.A., etc.) and hone in on the LPOA that fits your date and time scenario, which specifically states WHICH REMIC is being represented in the LPOA.  You may be surprised to find that Ocwen is limited as to what it can do (e.g., only manufacturing documents and not actually commencing a foreclosure proceeding).  You may also find the LPOA has expired.  It doesn’t mean they’re not still in the public record … it’s just that they’re expired.

(3) You need to specifically research the REMIC on the SECINFO.com website.

Get a complete copy of the 424(b)(5) Prospectus and SEC Form 15d and save them to file.  In the search bar for the particular REMIC, run the name OCWEN in the search engine and see if anything pops up.  Run the term “Sale and Servicing Agreement” and see what pops up.  If you don’t find specific notations to any event relating to Ocwen, it means two things:

(a.) you will need to locate an LPOA that contains such an Agreement; and

(b.) if you can’t find the Agreement listed in the public record, you’ll have to obtain it in discovery under Request for Production of Documents.

This my friends, is legal research and case strategy, NOT legal advice.  If you’re going to jump down rabbit holes, you’d better be prepared to dig deep!

If Ocwen is NOT allowed to enforce the terms of a Mortgage or Deed of Trust because you can show lack of authority vested to it … and you see the customary FDCPA language on the form they send you … then that would indicate, in asking for a sum certain, that they are in the business of collecting debts and thus are subject to the FDCPA. (This of course, has to be determined by a court of competent jurisdiction! I am not the KING of any Court, unlike some on the Internet that would posit such!)

When it comes to suing mortgage loan servicers like Ocwen Loan Servicing LLC, be aware that they have multiple sources to dip into when it comes to fighting their legal battles, even if it means dipping into other peoples’ escrow accounts for that money!  This is why Ocwen wants your house!  They will purposefully rack up so many servicing fees that by the time the house sells and they recoup their expenses, the entire proceeds of the sale is gone and the alleged “lender” Ocwen is supposedly representing, gets nothing.

But wait!   The alleged “lender” got money from credit default swaps, default insurance and title insurance. In fact, we guesstimate about 6 different sources of loss reimbursement, not to mention the FDIC if that corporate federal agency is in play.  Then, there’s the taxpayer.  We won’t go there, for now.

So let’s say we sue Ocwen, for the sake of argument.

UPDATE: The second of four FDCPA webinars on the subject has been re-scheduled for Thursday, June 22, 2017 at 8:00 p.m. EDT.  We will be doing something different in this Webinar, as R. J. Malloy will be walking through the process with me, step by step as we discuss pleadings development and purpose.  This is truly a webinar you DON’T want to miss!  For those of you who are confused about the price … EACH WEBINAR is $39.95!  I cannot do all 4 for that price because of costs.  If I did a live event in Orlando, you’d have to pay anywhere from $495 to $895 to attend a 1-day event, plus airfare and hotel, instead of paying a total of $159.80 for all 4 online workshops and this is a huge savings to you for the same education.

In the second of four FDCPA webinars, we have some new news to update you on about applications of the U. S. Supreme Court’s Spokeo, Inc. v Robins et al_ decision … you have to prove you suffered economic harm in order to make an FDCPA action stick.  I know, it’s the nation’s highest court’s way of impeding class-action lawsuits!  In a class action lawsuit, ALL of the Plaintiffs in the class have to have suffered a similar economic harm before the court will approve the class!

Look for signup information on the CloudedTitles.com.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, webinar