Tag Archives: MERSCORP v. Robinson



The case of Daniel and Darla Robinson has now been docketed with the United States Supreme Court, Docket #16-1127.

The 66-page Writ of Certiorari can be viewed here: 1. Petition for Writ (re USCA9 Case No. 15-55347)

The key question presented here is:

Whether Respondent, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., which is identified in most mortgages and deeds of trust as a “beneficiary” or “nominee” of the lender, possesses an interest in a borrower’s property sufficient to establish Article III standing.

To date, MERS nor its parent, MERSCORP, which is also “MERS” according to Rule 1 § 1 of its own 2009 Membership Rules, has confused courts all over the country and the author of this post is encouraging everyone to contact their attorney or institution of higher learning to facilitate support for this Writ in the form of an amicus brief in support of the nation’s highest court accepting this Writ for official hearing and review by the Court.  The deadline, according to Supreme Court rules, is April 17, 2017 to have all submissions in.

This case resulted in a very narrow ruling, albeit unpublished, by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, consisting of 3-1/2 pages.  Everyone needs to get behind this case because this is the only way we are going to get a real determination of what MERS is or isn’t, or claims it is or isn’t. Further, in reading this brief and in looking at other similar cases, not once has MERS ever proved it suffered an actual damage or injury to justify Article III standing (see Spokeo v. Robins, an earlier Supreme Court decision).

On behalf of all homeowners whose chains of title has been affected by MERS and its parent, you owe it to yourselves to circulate this Writ and get action on it.  Forward it to your Congressman, Senator, County Clerk, anyone you think will be effective in convincing the Justices to accept this case.  It is anticipated that the banking industry will pummel the Supreme Court with amicus briefs, as will MERS in its answers, which still prove nothing more than what has been made a conflict between the federal circuits and the state supreme courts across the country.  It’s about time this matter was put to rest.



Filed under Breaking News


BREAKING NEWS — The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just sent notice to all of the attorneys of its decision to cancel the hearings on December 8, 2016 in the matter of MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. et al v. Dan and Darla Robinson.  Here is the notice that attorney Al West just received from the Court:


Judicial Conference of the United States policy permits attorneys of record and parties in a case (including pro se litigants) to receive one free electronic copy of all documents filed electronically, if receipt is required by law or directed by the filer. PACER access fees apply to all other users. To avoid later charges, download a copy of each document during this first viewing.

United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNotice of Docket Activity

The following transaction was entered on 11/21/2016 at 1:05:28 PM PST and filed on 11/21/2016

Case Name: MERS, et al v. Daniel Robinson, et al
Case Number:   15-55347
Document(s): Document(s)


Docket Text:
Filed clerk order (Deputy Clerk: WL): The Court is of the opinion that the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the briefs and record and the decisional process would not be significantly aided by oral argument. Therefore, this matter is ordered submitted without oral argument on December 8, 2016, at Pasadena, California. Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2)(C). [10204835] (WL)

Notice will be electronically mailed to:

Mr. John Owen Campbell, Attorney
Honorable Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge
Mr. John Owen Murrin, III
JoAnn T. Sandifer
Ms. Mary Kate Sullivan
USDC, Los Angeles
Al West


OP-ED — Now for the speculation as to why the 9th Circuit cancelled the hearings.  Here is some of the scuttlebutt floating around:

  1. “Someone got to the Chief Judge.”
  2. The Court was worried that the room would be packed full of cheering homeowners in favor of the Robinson’s and that this powder keg would bring crowd control issues the Court didn’t want to have to deal with.
  3. The political tide is shifting in favor of the banks with the election of the Donald.
  4. Ipsa Res Loquiteur.
  5. Certainly NOT because I was going to be there.
  6. MERS and MERSCORP own the Courts too!  (example: See Minnesota, “MERS Statute”)
  7. No matter what the 9th Circuit rules, they already know this case is going up to the United States Supreme Court.
  8. Rioting in the streets; protests in front of the 9th Circuit.
  9. Appellate Judges don’t want to hear the truth either.
  10. MERS attorneys were afraid that Al West was going to blow them out of the water … someone made a phone call.

Whatever the case, you can bet that both sides are going to wait the 4-6 months for the ruling.  Prep will start now in anticipation for taking whatever ruling the 9th Circuit issues up to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Calling all Superlawyers! 

Now’s your chance to shine!   Please email me at cloudedtitles@gmail.com if you’re interested in putting forth an amicus brief that further eviscerates the MERS business model!   If you have any dirt on the former AG (Holder), now’s the time to spill the beans on his allegiance to MERSCORP (his client at Covington & Burling) and the banks!  There are a lot of pissed off homeowners that aren’t going away any time soon … this case is being watched by the judiciary all across America!


Here are comments from Fred Isaacs, an attorney with Jurisconsult, LLC in Lake Oswego, Oregon on the 9th Circuit’s decision NOT to hold oral arguments in the Robinson case: 

Speaking historically, it’s usually been a bad sign for an appellant to have a case submitted on the briefs — but as we both know, appellants always have an uphill battle in the appellate courts.  For the enumerated reasons set out below, this old historical rule may no longer mean much, if anything.  Moreover, it may be worth reminding the Robinsons what has been said about their appeal from the get-go.  You and I have consistently made clear to them that they have a viable appeal, but that simply means it has a fair chance of success; i.e., it’s not meritless, much less frivolous, but it does not mean it’s a slam-dunk win.  As you and I both know, only in 10-weights do the appellants have an edge over appellees; in all other appeals the appellees have the edge, and at best the Robinsons’ appeal is a 5-weight.  We have also been honest about telling them their chances of winning — at best one-in-three.  It might be worth reminding them that the odds were always against them, and nothing has changed on that front, oral argument or not.

Nevertheless, there are a few signs that might point to a little cautious optimism.

First, the appellate courts are hearing oral arguments less often than they did even five years ago.  This is largely a reflection of the fact that the number of appeals filed annually has more than tripled since the number of judges sitting on the Ninth Circuit was last increased — during the Carter administration.  In other words, the same number of judges are processing three times as many appeals: so, fewer cases get oral argument, and those that are argued get less time.  I myself am repeatedly seeing most 3-weights, and many 5-weights, being submitted on the briefs, something that just wasn’t done when I was with the Court.

Second, because more and more MERS cases are wending their ways through the federal courts, it is possible — indeed, likely — that the judges are aware of the factual and legal problems posed by these cases and may be looking to stem the tide by making a few definitive (?) rulings.  Oral argument isn’t necessary to do that.

Third, these MERS cases — despite their sometimes very ugly facts — really do present the courts with nearly pure questions of law.  Such appeals don’t need oral argument unless the Court is being asked to take a major step, e.g., overturn a long-standing law or declare something unconstitutional.  That isn’t our situation.

Fourth, most judges will admit — in private, anyway — that oral argument rarely changes their minds.

So, while I’m definitely not happy that this case is being submitted on the briefs, and I don’t view it as a good sign for us as the appellants, I’m not as pessimistic about our chances as I’d have been a few years ago.

Now that I read this back to myself, it may sound slightly dark, but I’d prefer to think it “realistic.”  I’d still put the odds at somewhere between 2:1 and 3:1 in favor of the appellees, but the fact that the case isn’t being argued doesn’t tip the scales any farther in their favor.


I made the previous comment that the judiciary across America was watching this case?  It appears (from one judge, who I am NOT going to name here because MERS reads these posts) who has researched PACER, the federal document custody and retrieval system), that something is “highly suspicious” with the cancellation of these hearings because upon this judge’s review of PACER, no actual “panel” was disclosed or appointed to hear the oral arguments that was cancelled in the first place!   My sources are checking further into this matter because for something like this to occur, because the Clerk of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals released the Order canceling the hearings.  The chief judge is supposed to “sign off” on these documents, yet there is no signature of anyone in virtual authority doing this.  There is no indication as to who is actually reviewing these documents and there certainly isn’t any “person” of authority that has come forward to (other than the stated reason given) reveal why the cancellation came three weeks out and not just days prior to the oral arguments.

My sources also tell me that this case is a real “hot potato” for the 9th Circuit.  Most of the states (as I’ve previously cited) are split on what MERS can and cannot do.  This I know for sure (and it would surely follow that IF I were to author an amicus brief to the U. S. Supreme Court, based on my research) … there is NOTHING (as to specific language) in any deed of trust or mortgage that allows MERS to:

Assign a mortgage or deed of trust from Party A to Party B

The language contained ONLY in the first few pages of standard Uniform Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Security Instruments relative to MERS says that MERS can only (a.) foreclose and sell the property (which it is NOT now doing because of all of the litigation it has had to defend for doing so); and (b.) release and cancel the Security Instrument.  There is NOTHING in the language of the contract that specifically says MERS can assign anything.

Get noticed of anything

If you look in Paragraph 15 of most standard Uniform Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac Security Instruments relative to MERS, the only parties entitled to “Notice” is the Lender and the Borrower.  This was succinctly pointed out in the Ditto decision in Tennessee, which you can refresh your memory on by reading here: MERS v DITTO_TN Supreme Court rules against MERS!

The other issue you have to also take into account is that MERS could have gone into state court to open up the Quiet Title Judgment that Al West secured for the Robinson’s, yet it did NOT exercise that right, probably because it didn’t have any idea that the case was ongoing.  The Shin case out of New York clearly noted that MERS is never aware of the transfer of any notes, so how then can it react and file lawsuits when it is not a party to the note?

Also to consider is the fact that if MERS wasn’t noticed doesn’t really mean anything.  If MERS WAS actually a named Defendant in the Quiet Title action, which in the Robinson case it was not, that would surely indicate that all claims MERS might have against the property are still on the table because MERS WASN’T NAMED!   MERS does not care about this fact however.  Nope.  Instead of leaving things status quo and biting the bullet on a case or two, MERS decided to jump into the fray and challenge a quiet title action by “forum shopping” (taking the case to federal court based on diversity jurisdiction and the value of the home, which exceeded $75,000, which must occur for diversity jurisdiction to be upheld) based on unproven harm to its business model.  At no time have I seen any proof of HOW MERS business model is harmed, with an exact dollar figure.

If MERS doesn’t suffer injury per Restatement of Mortgages, Third § 5.4, then what damage can be proven?

Enter: The MERS Rider

This 4-page Rider (attached here: mers_rider) is what is going to trap the homeowner in virtual hell.  I can tell you with a certainty that the title company will glaze over this document at the closing table (because the title companies ARE IN ON THE MERS SCHEME … and that’s exactly what it is, a scheme).  I have made numerous comments about this Rider in the past, which you can look up on this blog, so there is no need to waste your time restating everything again. Signing one of these will: (a.) bring title issues to your chain of title; and (b.) put you in proverbial legal hell if you ever stop making your mortgage payments!

If it was me, and I was handed this “Rider” at the closing table, I would get up and walk out of closing.  Knowing me, I’d get in trouble for giving the escrow agent a black eye for even pulling this document out of a file and insisting I sign it.  As pointed out in the Ditto decision, there is nothing stated past the first couple of pages of a mortgage or deed of trust that says (vaguely) what MERS is and what it’s entitled to do, because the framers of that document DON’T WANT YOU TO KNOW about MERS, so they bury it in the document.  That in of itself should sour your taste from borrowing money from mortgage companies … especially mortgage companies, who say they can get you low interest rates (I’ll bet you MERS is involved in it up to their necks).

My amicus brief

If I was able to get my amicus brief before the U. S. Supreme Court, you can bet I’d point out the research in both land record reports I issued.  While MERS put out a full-page ad in the Austin American-Statesman in the first instance, when the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION came out, things got quiet in Reston, Virginia (probably because MERS’s attorneys told the MERSCORP hierarchy to “put a sock in it”, so as not to drag MERS into a perpetual criminal foray). There are a lot of things for the nation’s highest court to consider … and I can tell you, MERS and its parent will fight like hell to keep their “fatally flawed business model” alive at all costs.  How do I know this?

A federal court clerk (in charge of handling docketing for pro se litigants) in the 8th Circuit was fired for hiding and delaying the filing of one pro se litigant’s paperwork after two other employees witnessed a bribery of said clerk on the street corner by what the witnessing clerks described as a “Bank of America junior lawyer”.   This is corruption at its finest folks.  The federal judiciary should be concerned and should be more open about this type of behavior because America has already gotten a bad taste in its mouth of the “status quo” and voted for change. Our court system is the last resort of sanctity for fairness and equity and if that portion becomes corrupted, nothing else matters except Patrick Henry’s famous saying about “the blood of Patriots and Tyrants”.  As to this, I believe the judiciary is fully aware.

More to come as details unfold in this high-profile case!


Filed under Breaking News, Op-Ed Piece


BREAKING NEWS (from the poster)! 

For those of you who are planning to attend the Honolulu, Hawaii Quiet Title Workshop, please be advised of the following:

  1. This will be the last workshop of 2016 that Al West and I are doing together.  Either be there or miss out.
  2. This will be the last quiet title workshop that Al West and I are offering to the general public, due to lack of interest.  So, this is your last opportunity to have a powerful think tank at your disposal.  You can get the information on the workshop by clicking on the following links:
  3. QT WORKSHOP_HONOLULU_REGISTRATION FORM  (Please follow the instructions on the form!)
  4. QUIET TITLE WORKSHOP FLYER_HONOLULU  (I would recommend using discount hotel services to book your room and airfare, as our group discounts have expired!)
  5. I have decided to go a different direction involving my consulting work, which means I will be handling more attorney-based cases involving investors and homeowners who have retained counsel that is willing to accept consulting services; otherwise, I will only take cases on that basis.
  6. I am not a lawyer referral service; however, I can assist you in vetting attorneys, once you find them.  This will be done on a conference call basis for a flat fee of $75.00, payable by credit card in advance of the conference call.
  7. You can still purchase The Quiet Title War Manual, Clouded Titles and The Credit Restoration Primer from the Clouded Titles website.
  8. The online COTA Workshop is still in development and probably will not be ready until 2017.  If I become aware of any COTA Workshops being hosted by other entities in the future, I will inquire as to whether the folks who monitor this blog will be allowed to attend, at which point I will post the information accordingly.
  9. Any referrals to other consulting services outside of my immediate concern are the responsibility of those parties wishing to contact and contract with those services.  I no longer am working with outside parties who may or may not have further useful information to help you with your case.
  10. The rates on my COTAs now start at $1295.00 and go up from there.  I have a “full plate” and anticipate having a full plate for the next 3 years.  Despite what the banks, MERS and law enforcement have attempted to do in smearing me all over the media, with the help of a few self-proclaimed “investigators” who run  websites that state I ripped off the U. S. Government, I am still economically intact and am not going anywhere.  The Orlando Sentinel’s Henry Curtis got his story all wrong and was probably paid off by someone to write the article against the Osceola County Clerk in the first place, which makes his brand of journalism shoddy and unreliable at best, about as unreliable as you can get.  Any news outlet that would hire him would be a huge mistake and a disservice to the public at large. The current Osceola County Sheriff STILL isn’t running for re-election and the 9th Circuit State’s Attorney who refused to investigate the Forensic Examination commissioned by the Clerk was defeated in the Democratic primary last August.  The voters have awakened!

That being said … 

  1. I will still continue to post updated information on this site.  Once the online workshops are up, please note they are general in nature and are only there to help you formulate your research in conducting chain of title issues and will not offer legal advice, attorney referrals or any other subject matter information that is not relevant to chain of title.
  2. I will still continue to be the “foe” of MERS, MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. and the banks.  I am sick and tired of them and wish they were all in prison.  Unfortunately, the United States Government is in bed with the banks; yet the average, uninformed consumer still chooses to participate in impulse buying of homes they are NOT entitled to and cannot afford; thus, the same nonsense that plagued us in the 90’s and the millennia will continue to plague us for at least the next decade as the banks continue to water down the Dodd-Frank Act through their lobbyists.
  3. If you wish for Al West and I to come to your city to conduct a Quiet Title Workshop, there are firm parameters you will have to follow. You will have to guarantee 30 paid attendance for the event and the rate will be higher than what we normally charge to do a workshop and you will have to pay our travel to and from the event, plus meeting room and hotel rooms. No exceptions.
  4. I am still working on the FDCPA book.  This book is going to be a powerful think piece, in addition to all of the case citations, strategies and legal attack plans placed within this work, based on previous history of those who have been successful in such actions.  This has become the most formidable attack plan against the servicers and their law firms who lie in court about who they truly represent.  Yes folks, we are knee deep in servicer fraud.  In my estimation, the named plaintiff in a foreclosure suit does not know they’re the named plaintiff!
  5. The federal court systems (as well as the state court systems) are corrupt as hell!   Sure, there are a few judges out there that get it academically, but until you do your research and bring an adequate “game plan” to the table, all of the bad case law will continue to screw things up in the legal system because people may be mad, but they’re still unprepared financially and in all aspects of their education involving legal matters.
  6. Most attorneys have figured out how to scam homeowners for monthly payments and give them nothing in return.  I am still getting email from homeowners who are concerned that they may have picked the wrong attorney to represent them.  I am not an attorney referral service, but I have a few that I work with that I have found to be reliable.  If you have started your litigation pro se however, they may choose not to work with you.
  7. Please do not contact me about TILA and RESPA issues. That is not my focus.  There is narrow case law in these areas and you still aren’t going to get and free house, despite what anyone tells you.  I have been contacted by United States Treasury Agents regarding certain claims made by firms who tell consumers that all they have to do is file a rescission and they get a free house.  Unlike what happened to me 20 years ago, it is not me that is the target here.
  8. I will continue to do county land record audits.  If you know of someone who needs (or has indicated) they want one done, please let me know. If you’re in California, Al West will show the County Recorder how they can get a county land record audit done without the charges coming out of their budgets.
  9. Al West and I are still working on projects together.  Al West and I will be at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hearings on MERSCORP v. Robinson.  Yes, I authored quite a bit of the reply brief and I am very well aware (as MERS is) of the fact that MERS sent a mole in to bug our Las Vegas Quiet Title Workshop. I found out about that from information supplied to me that originated through a federal judge in Maryland. It would appear to indicate to me that the folks at MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. (and the U.S. government) understand that I am “not going away any time soon” … and if I do, it will be by their hand and their doing and not mine!  We are still coordinating efforts regarding certain AWL and ABC mortgage loans. We are also handling IRS Whistleblower cases!
  10. In certain matters, I may also be testifying in court. This still does NOT make me an expert witness. Please do not contact me to testify at your hearing or at trial.  If subpoenaed without my knowledge or consent, consider me a hostile witness ab initio.  I still want my day in front of the grand jury, be it state or federal.  I have a lot to tell them and show them.

Beware of whack jobs that continue to dwell on what happened to me 20 years ago.  As attorney Lynn Szymoniak eloquently put it … “it doesn’t matter what he did 20 years ago, what matters is what he’s doing now!”  If Ms. Szymoniak didn’t believe in what I was doing, she would NOT have shown up to my COTA Workshop to lecture to the class.  Please support The Housing Justice Foundation.

Finally, when I’m done with the FDCPA book, I am going to pick up where I left off and finish the “other book” I have been working on … a book which explains in detail what happened to me 20 years ago, the American legal system, American politics in general, and why Americans are becoming polarized in certain aspects of society.  The U. S. Government will definitely NOT like what is in this “other book” (although it’s not as dicey as “Snowden”).  If you get a chance to see that movie … this man should be exonerated and not indicted.  He just sent a warning shot to all of you out there that think you’re “secure” when you’re anything but.

No, I’m not a doom-and-gloomer.  Like many of you out there who are evaluating your future plans and strategies, that is a wise move in my book. Remember, the U. S. government is paranoid as a whole and government employees believe everything Uncle Sam tells them.  I have found trusts to be quite handy these days.



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


This op-ed piece is not legal advice, just the poster’s observations!

Within the last few months, I’ve been receiving emails and phone calls from people who are either contemplating filing a quiet title action to clear title to their property or have actually filed one and are wondering if they did the right thing.

I say (in non-lawyer-like fashion), “It depends on what attorney you talk to.”

Many attorneys across the country have won numerous quiet title actions, trespass to try title actions and suits to remove a cloud; however, this quasi in rem realm now supports a different type of quiet title action … those involving securitized mortgages, which mean the involvement of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS).  There are few attorneys that understand quasi in rem actions and fewer have not won them let alone satisfactorily addressed them in a court of law or of equity.

In the latest California cases involving MERS and its parent, MERSCORP Holdings Inc., MERS’s counsel has brought the same three arguments into play (whether amended or not):

  1. That MERS and MERSCORP’s civil rights have been deprived under the 5th and 14th Amendments to due process;
  2. That the California quiet title statutes are unconstitutional; and
  3. That both entities are entitled to Notice of any quiet title action brought where they are named as anything on the affected mortgage or deed of trust;

In both the Robinson and Johnston cases, MERS and MERSCORP’s attorneys asserted these claims.  In the Johnston case however, the judge did not agree with the word “Robinson” every time MERS’s attorneys brought their name up.  It never ceases to amaze me how two judges in the same federal district can come up with two different thought processes on whether or not a California Superior Court Judge committed a civil conspiracy against MERS and MERSCORP by ruling on a petition to quiet title when there is no recorded interest in the real property records that specifically identifies WHO (besides the property owners) holds superior title.

In the initial oral arguments in the Robinson case, the federal judge (Gutierrez) spent 45 minutes arguing with MERS’s Counsel (Owen Campbell from Severson & Werson in Irvine, California) over what rights MERS and MERSCORP didn’t have.   Then, months later, reversed himself in response to a judgment on the pleadings that was (I believe), illogically misfiled by the Robinson’s then-counsel (Susan Murphy, who I would never retain to defend my title if my life depended on it).  How does this happen, you ask?  Political pressure?  Maybe.  Judicial pressure?  Maybe.   Payoff or bribe?  Hmmm.  Makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

But the point is, when you ask an attorney HOW MANY quiet title actions he (or she) has won involving quasi in rem issues, you’re likely to get:

  1. A deflected response; or in the alternative,
  2. An argument against filing quiet title actions.

After talking to many attorneys, I have determined (in my own paralegal-consultant sort of way) that there is a right time and a wrong time to file a quiet title action.

The Wrong Time to File a Quiet Title Action

Quiet title actions invoke a remedy in equity.  By all fundamental reasoning, quiet title actions do not give cause to resolving issues of standing when a foreclosure is present; thus, the time to NOT file a quiet title action is when you are facing foreclosure.  My research shows that judges are likely to view your quiet title action as a “ploy” and when the banks’ attorney walks into court and says, “Your Honor, they just want a free house!”, your quiet title action goes right out the window!

Why?  Because you failed to attack and defeat the foreclosure FIRST!   This is done by making the other side prove its case.  Most of the time, the homeowner, who’s already so pissed off they could literally sink their teeth into the opposing attorney’s ass as soon as he/she opens their mouth, is screaming “fraud” in the courtroom, especially if they’re pro se (or pro per, I don’t care).  They bring in armloads of research in an attempt to “prove a negative”, which I deem appears counterproductive to the effort of making the other side prove its case.

In the alternative, they file a quiet title action, along with ten other claims for damages (or let their attorneys do it for them), naming a dozen or so defendants (to which I say, “the attorney should’ve known better), which enormously drives up the cost of litigation.

Why?  Because it costs money to serve all of the named defendants and money to publish against unknown defendants, that’s why!  Then you have to factor in that each defendant will file an answer (oh, and here you thought they would all default?  Seriously?) and each answer they file requires a measured response.  Each measured response will cost you big time.  That too adds to the costs of litigation.   Then there is discovery on each defendant.  Multiply your discovery costs (along with the depositions) for each defendant.  Now you’re talking some serious coin.  This could have all been prevented with a little hindsight.

It is my belief, along with most of the successful foreclosure defense litigators I work alongside (as a consultant or contributor to the effort) of, that Rule #1 is “MAKE THE OTHER SIDE PROVE ITS CASE!”   Half the time, they can’t.

SURVEY SAYS: Stop the foreclosure first.  Get a dismissal.  Then look into the other option.  Countersuit or quiet title action. 

The Right Time to File a Quiet Title Action

Because of the MERS® System business model, there is an “Achilles’ Heel” that apparently was recognized by Judge Gutierrez in the Robinson case.  At the time the quiet title action was filed, there was no recorded assignment of deed of trust in the real property records of Los Angeles County, California.  The original lender, United Pacific Mortgage, was defunct (that means, out of business and couldn’t be located) and had to be served through the Secretary of State, by permission of the Court (the Superior Court).   The numerous quiet title actions filed by Al West took (on average) of about six months.  It should also be noted in the Robinson case that at the time of the quiet title filing, there was no alleged default; thus, no controversy to rule on, despite any non-appearance by any claimants.

Thus, if you’re NOT in default (that too, has to be rightfully determined, given the propensity in securitization that the investors who actually funded your loan were paid and the sponsor-seller of the REMIC made money at least 5X over the loan amount) and your original lender is out of business … WHO ARE YOU GOING TO SERVE?   The lender of record.  This is what makes quiet title actions so “timely” in this scenario.

The MERS’ Business Model is Flawed! 

MERS is a “day late and a dollar short” on its business model.  This goes to show you that you can’t “have your (business model) cake and eat it too” (Geez, two cliches in one paragraph … I’m on my A-game today, folks!)  MERS promotes to its system users that it doesn’t have to pay recording fees. MERS makes all the money when its system’s users electronically transfer the borrower’s loan on the MERS® System; however, the MERS Rules of Membership specifically state that the users of the system don’t have to file or transfer anything on line if they don’t want to.  So, the Milestone Reports are disclaimed here as “a joke” and not worth using in discovery.  Even MERSCORP disclaims the information on its website for accuracy, knowing that its users don’t always “use” the system.

Now ask yourself why it is that MERS’ users think they can simply draft an assignment (with no knowledge of the validity of its contents) and record it, showing the Assignor being the originating (defunct) lender and the Assignee being the REMIC trust (who can’t accept assignment past the cut-off date of the REMIC, which of course, MERS will argue doesn’t matter because the Borrower is not (mistakenly) a party to securitization, when we know damned well they are!   So in this equation, there’s the Assignor, the Assignee and the TOTAL ASS (the one creating the assignment out of thin air with no proof of its contents)!

They’ve Been Warned! 

These morons are paid independent contract signers who sit there all day and sign hundreds of these documents in robotic fashion.  These are the entities that must be deposed.  In the long run, many of them will face jail time and will rat out their bosses to save their own asses.   Bank of America, N.A. is one of the biggest producers of these “manufactured assignments” and its “bosses” will face some real criminal issues at some point, I predict.  They’ve been warned!

Bank of America is not alone in its distorted thinking however.  Wells Fargo Bank has its own document manufacturing plant in Dakota County, Minnesota (and the Minnesota AG’s office is “watching it” with keen interest).  Citimortgage has a document manufacturing plant in St. Charles County, Missouri.  Chase has two known document manufacturing plants in Monroe, Louisiana and Columbus, Ohio (at its fortress).  You’ll see more self-assignment/self-serving-type garbage being generated by these folks.   All of this is done to create “standing” for whoever is going to attempt to steal your home in foreclosure using manufactured documents for the purposes of theft of property through the simple costs of litigation.   Be prepared to shell out for depositions in your foreclosure case.

Then there’s Nationwide Title Clearing, who was named in 40 separate allegations of criminal wrongdoing in the Osceola County Forensic Examination. They now boast over 16-million documents recorded (kind of like the sign under the “golden arches” that says (rhetorically), “over 16-million served”) in land records all over the country.  This is going to expose this band of folks to a whole plethora of criminal charges, because current evidence shows that the people manufacturing these documents are paid minions with flimsy “capacities” to support their activities.  When it all shakes down, NTC employees will rat out their superiors to the grand juries investigating NTC (“the writing is on the wall”).  OMG!  Another cliche!  Can you say, UPL?  That’s a felony folks!   You can’t “buy” your way out of prison like Jamie Dimon can!

We discuss this extensively in THE QUIET TITLE WAR MANUAL!   Keep watching the Clouded Titles website for details!

Back End Defense! 

In summation, there is NO GUARANTEE that (in the quasi in rem realm) that your quiet title action will hold as long as MERS is allowed to permeate the land records with the crap that its robomills put out in its name.  Hell, MERS doesn’t even know who’s generating what at any given moment.  How can they defend against that?   We still haven’t heard the last of the “alleged resolution” that gave William Hultman authority to appoint anyone as a “signer” for MERS, so that’s about 20,000+ robosigners that have an opportunity to “rat MERS out” to the grand jury to save their own asses!

You may be able to beat the rap, but you can’t beat the ride, eh Bill?

Yes, MERS does read this blog.  In another chapter, I’ll address the issue of how to get MERS’s attorneys disbarred.


Filed under Quiet Title Education

Since MERS says it holds an adverse claim to title, MERS AND MERSCORP should be held liable for slandering and clouding title!

It is my opinion that when an attorney fighting MERS refuses FREE outside consultation, they shouldn’t be practicing law!  This lack of attorney education also goes to the core of my argument as to why MERS should be held liable (1) as a nominee for the lender; and (2) actions of the principal bind the actions of the agent/actions of the agent bind the actions of the principal.  In other words, we can’t have our cake and eat it too, can we? 

MERS (an acronym for “Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.”) wants to be all things to all people … so much so, that it appears to be putting itself at risk for incurring liability for slandering and clouding the title to every mortgage and deed of trust in the United States it is involved with.   Former law professor Christopher Peterson (S. J. Quinney School of Law, University of Utah) eloquently pointed out MERS’ potential liability in at least one white paper he has authored on the subject. (Professor Peterson now works for the CFPB in DC … there’s some more acronyms for you).

To further explore the liability factor, one only need examine the ruling by J. Curtis Joyner, U. S. District Court Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. See the ruling at this link!  Judge Joyner took the time to explain (in nearly four full pages of his ruling) why the agent is liable if he represents the principal in matters involving a mortgage loan.  This is where the “line in the sand” is going to force MERSCORP and its “brainless child”, MERS, to appeal Joyner’s ruling, at its peril.   I predict that this entire fiasco, with all its contradictory issues, will end up in front of the Supreme Court of the United States and the contractual issues boasted by MERS in all of its pleadings will finally be tested and put to rest.  What it will teach us, as American homeowners, is NOT to sign mortgage papers and enter into an agreement where an “agent” is allowed to call the shots on behalf of a lender that may NOT have actually loaned you the money! (If that’s what you want to call it!)

When one examines the latest ruling issued by Judge Phillip Gutierrez in the MERSCORP v. Robinson Case in California, it appears that several issues are now present, which I will discuss line-item here:

1. The discussion involving MERS in the latest ruling (see the ruling here) appears to be the latest in a string of regurgitations of previous decisions favoring MERS in California.  It appears to be a complete 180-degree reversal of the judge’s previous opinion, which basically favored the homeowner.   The judge did NOT hold oral arguments.   The ruling did NOT discuss the relationship between MERS and MERSCORP.  It primarily focused on the contractual obligations created by the Borrowers (the Robinsons) when they signed their Deed of Trust and Promissory Note, by involving MERS in their contract.

According to Judge Gutierrez’s “fans” (see http://therobingroom.com/Judge.aspx?ID=1548#comments), the judge managed only a 3.0 rating on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the most favorable rating a judge can get.  This judge’s 180-degree reversal smacks of direct influence on the judge from somewhere!

2. The attorney for the Robinson’s (Susan Murphy, California State Bar No. 185335; Advocate Legal) was offered a FREE conference call by two attorneys and other litigation support personnel studying the issues in her case … and REFUSED help.  Instead, she sent an email to the Robinson’s telling them that “I am bold in my approach.” (trying to be a hero, huh?) Murphy failed miserably in cracking the “wordsmithing” and “contractual approaches” that MERS’ counsel uses to win cases.  In my opinion (and not representing others who claim to have the “final word” on everything), Murphy failed miserably in her “bold approach”, all the while she racked up in excess of $60,000 in legal fees and missed a scheduling conference in the process, forcing her to have to submit the Motion for Summary Judgment on the Pleadings that got her into trouble in this case.  It’s always procedural errors that come back to bite the attorneys in the arse!   Missed hearings.  Missed filings!  Lack of attention paid to case schedulings!   Missed conference calls that are court-mandated!  I’m getting numerous calls these days in this regard!  What a shame!  It’s no wonder the actions of a few egocentric attorneys ruin it for the rest of us and unfairly give all of the good attorneys a bad name!

3. I predict there will be no “podcast” on anyone else’s channel which features Susan Murphy and Al West, because the Robinson’s are pissed at her for talking about their case to outside “influences” and Al West will have nothing to do with these same folks who claim to be the “final authority” on everything financial!  You see, MERS and the banking entities that appear to “control” every facet of our daily lives, read these blog posts and watch these podcasts and glean information for use in battling homeowners in their cases.  So when a homeowner or their counsel goes and rants on a blog (like so many do on occasion), they generally discuss their strategies online and get legal advice from non-lawyers (who are risking their own arses on UPL charges) and podcasts are a great way to get foreclosure defense attorneys to talk all about their legal strategies online, which I consider a real detriment to their clients.  For Susan Murphy to talk to anyone about her client’s case demonstrates disregard for client privacy in my book … another reason you have to be careful who you retain as counsel to represent you.   The bigger the ego, the greater the chance of a blog post saying “too much”.  This is why the banks’ and MERS’ have I.T. Departments to monitor what the “other side” is doing.  So if you’re in litigation trying to defend your home, be careful who you talk to.  According to Dr. Daniel Robinson who I spoke with briefly, “We are done with Susan Murphy!” was his last comment regarding her representation on his case.

Hi there Boys and Girls … Can you say, “MALPRACTICE!”  Sure ya can!  (quoting Mr. Rogers … sic)  

I wouldn’t hire Susan Murphy to represent me if my life depended on it!

4. Murphy’s brief to the Court even misstated the famous U. S. Supreme Court case Carpenter v. Longan case from 1872, where she referenced to the case as Carpenter v. “Longren”.   She appears to merge NOTE arguments with TITLE arguments in certain portions of her pleadings.  NOT ONCE DOES MURPHY MENTION THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MERSCORP AND MERS; OR MERSCORP AND ITS MEMBERS!  In fact, I couldn’t find the word “MERSCORP” anywhere in her brief, could you?  WTF!!?!?!?   You can tell that Murphy was led right down the path that MERSCORP-retained counsel wanted her to travel by the way her pleadings were worded.  I wonder how much time she actually spent reading the intricacies of the Sprint case she attempt to rebut?  Nowhere did I see any reference to the Pennsylvania case of Nancy Becker v. MERSCORP and MERS, yet she cited a Vermont case in her case citations.  Instead of bringing the real arguments about “wordsmithing” and deception regarding the contractual vagueness and ambiguity that mortgages and deeds of trust contain about MERS to the forefront, all of that vernacular seems to be absent.   Murphy’s arguments were poorly framed because she let MERSCORP counsel take her down a different path.  All of these arguments become the “law of the case” and any appeal effort would thus be based on the current “state of affairs” as they exist!  You cannot appeal what you didn’t plead at the district level!  Now this case will go to trial … with different counsel!  Because of what Murphy did, new counsel is going to have their work cut out for them.

5. Of course MERS is going to deny that it clouds title to property!  Why should it admit to anything?   It has already become the “substance of abuse” in today’s court systems when issues involving mortgage foreclosures and quiet title actions are in play.  Of course, this case makes things worse for homeowners in California, because MERSCORP will see to it that all of this gets published so they can rub the public’s nose in it!  It will become a PR stunt for them, right Janis?  This also goes to the core of any future financial education … DO NOT BORROW MONEY FROM A LENDER WHO REALLY ISN’T A LENDER AND DON’T SIGN MORTGAGE PAPERWORK THAT HAS THE WORD “MERS” ON IT! 

6. It appears that MERS is demanding “notice rights” in California, like it got in Kansas and Missouri (with the Kesler and Bellistri cases, respectively).  Anywhere MERS and its counsel can find an “open door”, you can bet they’ll take advantage of it.  They do this because they know their days are numbered if they don’t.  The more case law that MERS can get established, the more it has a foothold … and the longer MERSCORP stockholders are making money.  The government (by an April 13, 2011 Consent Order) has a foothold into their business model and even if you have a “tiger by the tail”, the tiger will continue to bite and scratch because it hasn’t been completely muzzled and restrained.  What I don’t think MERS recognizes is that the more “notice rights it wants”, the more it sets itself up for a major amount of legal backlash.  The Consent Order it agreed to mandates that MERS and MERSCORP have to tell the U. S. government every single time that it or one of its members (MERSCORP members are contractually bound to MERSCORP, not MERS … Murphy missed this point completely) get sued, MERS and MERSCORP have to disclose this to the U. S. government … and they have to provide case tracking … thus, the U. S. government is also monitoring your case!  This could go to the core argument that things wouldn’t be the way they are now if MERS didn’t do anything wrong.  Well, here’s a thought … why not hold MERS liable for everything?   Imagine 100,000 lawsuits filed against MERS by homeowners who were NOT in default, all wanting to quiet title to their properties … filed all at once?  There wouldn’t be enough lawyers in the U. S. to defend an onslaught of that magnitude!  The only thing MERS understands is its bottom line and when that starts to shrink … it’s stockholders get pissed … OH WAIT A MINUTE!   Fannie and Freddie are stockholders in MERSCORP!   MERS is a shell with no money; all the money is in MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.!

7.  All property owners need to examine their mortgages and deeds of trust.  If you see the word MERS anywhere on your document … beware.  It’s worse than caveat emptor, because you put all your faith in your ability to make mortgage payments so you could blindly follow the American Dream with no financial education to support your decision-making processes.  You believed what the government told you … that everyone should own a home.   Winston Smith loved Big Brother too and he ended up with a cage of rats on his head!  If MERS is on your mortgage or deed of trust, you should be putting your “war chest” together, because you’re going to need it in order to sell your house, because you personally could be held liable for transferring property that doesn’t have marketable title.  Insurable title and marketable title are two different things folks … if you don’t know the difference, you need to get educated.  This is why I wrote Clouded Titles.

8. When you have issues with the chain of title, it is primarily because you don’t know WHO has a legal lien interest in your property.  If MERS claims to hold legal title, MERS should have a fiduciary responsibility to defend its position as to warranty of title.  Holding legal title brings a relevant responsibility to defend its marketability (or the impairment thereof) and MERS will not defend title to any property, as it should!  MERS cannot and will not do this because it claims it’s only a “nominee” for the lender (anything to get out of blame).  This is by design to benefit the “lender”, who has already sold your loan by the time you get to the closing table!  MERS claims to hold legal title because it creates an adversarial position for which MERS claims it should be noticed if a suit gets filed.  This way, it can go find a “lender” to come in and challenge your quiet title suit, whether the lender is the real party in interest or not!  The idea is to outspend you by bringing in fictitious claimants!  It’s dirty pool … but that’s MERS and MERSCORP.  They don’t fight fair!    That’s why MERSCORP had to litigate against the Robinsons because if it can get a state judge to agree with the federal judge’s ruling, then every California homeowner will have to sue MERSCORP and MERS to get anywhere, which means all MERS-related deeds of trust in California will have to take these two troublemakers to task over breach of warranty of title when they attempt quiet title, otherwise, MERSCORP will outspend a homeowner in court trying to get his quiet title judgment thrown out.  As long as people keep signing MERS-originated mortgages and deeds of trust, these entities will continue to be perpetuated. Why not consider using MERS vague language against them when it comes to breach of warranty of title?  They wanna hold bare legal title … let ’em pay for their mistake! The parent is responsible for the behavior of the child.

9. When you sign a mortgage or deed of trust, you warrant to defend title.  That’s a contractual right afforded you in the contract.  When MERS is involved, the condition of title is jeopardized, because any conveyance of title to the property would be questionable because of unknown intervening assignees that may come back at some point in time and claim an interest once you’ve sold the property … and that’s not conveying marketable title in my book!  Since the title companies insure “around the defects” in title through Schedule B … the title company’s policy is worthless as to coverage!

10.  Statistic:  There are less than 100 people running MERS and MERSCORP (including the Boards of Directors).  There are over 70-million homeowners out there that MERS and MERSCORP have screwed with the MERS business model!  I’d say we outnumber ’em, huh?  Imagine 70-million quiet title actions all being filed at once, naming MERS as a nominee, beneficiary and liable for damages for breach of warranty!   MERS will claim, “you signed the contract … it’s on you!”  MERS cannot hold legal title without assuming some sort of liability for its impairment of marketability.  MERS position in the contract appears to hold it accountable if there are double liability issues or issues with title because the MERS business model is fatally flawed.  MERS is not a government-sponsored entity, even though it was founded by Fannie and Freddie.  This whole scheme revolves around securitization and screwing investors.  That’s why I’ve moved all my investment portfolios out of financials!   Further, MERS’s parent, MERSCORP, owns the “shell” and pays its stockholders dividends (helping Fannie and Freddie operate) because homeowners are desperate to achieve the American Dream and will sign anything put in front of them.  You see now why the FHFA isn’t suing MERSCORP and MERS?  They’re all in bed together!

11. The contractual language that appears in your mortgage or deed of trust (involving MERS) uses poorly-worded phraseology to trick you at closing!  MERS also claims to be the beneficiary too!  Look for an actual definition of “beneficiary” in your mortgage or deed of trust … it won’t be there!   Look for the definition of “nominee” in your mortgage or deed of trust.  It won’t be there either!  Then … if you happen to be in one of the northwestern states that has ruled MERS is NOT a valid beneficiary … look for a MERS Rider to be sprung on you at closing!   If it was me … I would walk out of closing immediately!  If you sign this Rider, you will have contractually screwed yourself and the title company that is leading you by the nose like a pig to slaughter is in on the scam! All the vagaries within the contract were designed to screw the homeowner at closing!  From the point in time you sign your name to the promissory note, you will never know who really owns your loan.  This could affect your title’s warranty.  Therefore, you should study the term “warranty of title” and see just how liable you are if you sell a property that has been tainted by MERS’ influence!

12.  Read Murphy’s brief and the judge’s 180-degree reversal on his previous ruling and tell me something’s “not rotten in Denmark!”  See all of the “meat” of the case on our new NEWS LINK on the corporate website: http://www.dkconsultants.us

The author of this blog post is a paralegal and the material provided here is for educational purposes only and should not be construed as the rendering of legal advice nor does it draw any conclusions of law or guarantee a legal outcome.  All opinions expressed are his own opinions, Constitutionally protected by the 1st Amendment!

NOTE: Subscribe to this blog for the latest news and information about upcoming COTA Workshops and CLE’s.


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