Tag Archives: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc.

WILL THERE BE AN UPTICK IN FORECLOSURES ONCE THE CORONA-CRISIS IS OVER?

(OP-ED) — The author of this post is a consultant to attorneys on foreclosure and chain of title matters and none of the following opinions should be constituted as legal advice or seek to guarantee a legal outcome. It posits what this author sees as what is to come.  It may not be the “whole new way of life” everyone thinks is going to take place due to this pandemic. 

This post is not for the faint of heart nor is it designed to make you more paranoid than most of you probably already are.  It is designed to impart some common sense rationality into dealing with the post-traumatic issues of what we collectively are all perceiving as a “crisis”.

Some of us think this whole thing is overblown.  The majority however have unknowingly allowed the “crisis” to replace common sense with survival fear … and rightly so.  It’s one thing to think that the coronavirus was just going to stay put in China when in fact, we have such an upwardly mobile society that everyone has been instilled with traveling to different parts of the world, be it on a plane, on a cruise, whatever … no one expected this would hit America and I believe we were all duped as to the “numbers” and the “purpose” for COVID-19.

Here are some interesting “takes” I’ve picked up on over the last couple of weeks …

  1. Chinese-Americans who are loyal to this country have stated to me that China well understated the numbers of dead and infected as the result of the viral spread there.
  2. The understatement was intentional, to lull us all (and I mean the World Health Organization (WHO) and the countries affected by the virus, including America) into a false sense of security so we would continue to go on about our daily lives as if this virus really didn’t matter.
  3. Knowing that we were already embroiled in political turmoil in this country, we’ve been “played” by the Chinese in a further effort to destroy the credibility of many of our elected leaders and further create political dissension in our every day lives.
  4. Most of the world was not medically ready for another pandemic.  If WHO was really concerned with the spread of this virus, it should have reacted more quickly when it was observed that the virus was spreading outside of China’s borders.
  5. We can all point fingers at our government for being “reactive”, because that is how our government has always been … reactive instead of proactive.  We weren’t ready for the virus when it hit our shores and we sure as hell aren’t ready for it now.
  6. Our medical systems in this country rely too much on non-essential and boutique surgeries and were not ready to deal with massive shortages in critical care supplies and labor.
  7. Our government’s medical “advisories” and social “responsibilities” were lacking in keeping its undisciplined citizenry safe from each other, allowing for Darwinistic opportunities to avail themselves upon an unsuspecting public.
  8. Instead of heading off the pandemic “at the pass”, state and local governments were slow to react to contain the virus and identify the “vectors”, which is what South Korea did when it first became aware of the invasion of the virus.
  9. The saving grace was that most state governments went above and beyond the federal measures enacted to stop evictions and foreclosures during the coronavirus outbreak.
  10. The not-so-saving grace is what happens after the fallout rears its ugly head, the supply chain breaks down in certain quarters and the economy can’t put enough people back to work fast enough to recover from the shock the country took in the 30-60 “stay in place” periods.

This is where thinks get “quirky”.

As was explained in some “insider” memorandums which I managed to retrieve through my back channels, the mortgage loan servicers (especially on these MERS-originated mortgages) have to pay advances on the distribution dates to the investors who funded the loans through the various REMICs (Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits).

There were (at last count) roughly 6.6-million people that applied for unemployment benefits, despite the economic “stimulus” package.  In my twisted mind, this is like getting a hand job by a hooker, wherein the “wham bam” happens and then you realize the relief was only temporary and you’re right back at the stress level you started from before “the act” happened.

The mortgage loan servicers who handle the payments to the REMICs (the advance payments of principal and interest on every securitized loan) every month on the distribution date, have to pay those advance payments whether borrowers make those payments or not.  I hope you got that.  No matter (during this crisis) whether you made your monthly mortgage payment or not, you are NOT in default because the servicer has been making your payments anyway.  They just won’t tell you that.

The problem becomes worse however when the servicers have to make these payments regularly over time, believing that they can collect the the past due payments from the borrowers (who are out of work or close to being out of work or short on funds) who are wanting a forbearance on their mortgage loans.  This means the servicers would have to consider putting the payments (including interest) on the back end of the loan.  This means that for those of you who (for example) were on “Payment 22” of your amortization chart on a 30-year fixed rate loan, you’re asking for Payments 22, 23 and 24 (plus interest) to be put on the back end of your loan, which is compounding interest upon principal upon interest.  Let’s face it, most Americans do NOT have the reserves to make the mortgage payments past one month, which is why they had to borrow the money to buy the home in the first place.

Now the mortgage loan servicers are stressed financially because the payments have to be paid into the securitized trust pool every month, regardless of the borrowers’ circumstances.  The servicers may be forced into “having to rob Peter to pay Paul”, which means the servicers will borrow from escrow accounts all over their servicing network of mortgages, in the hopes that they’ll be able to repay those escrow accounts back over time.  The problem is, when that doesn’t happen (and even at the time funds were borrowed from escrows), there is still a shortage in the escrow accounts that the servicers borrowed from to pay the REMICs their monthly payments to.  A prolonged period of these payments (6-9 months; if this crisis were to continue) would put the servicers in jeopardy.

Fast forward to the end of the corona-crisis … 

The mortgage loan servicers are out of pocket all of the advance payments they had to pay during the crisis, which means they’re going to be on an all-out campaign to try and recover as much of the shortfalls as possible to reimburse all of the escrows they borrowed from to keep everything looking “current” on the books (this is why servicers get in trouble).  This is one of the reasons why Ocwen got into trouble and ended up having to sell $600-million in securities to bolster its “advance” payment funds to investors.  That’s like chasing a large, lump-sum credit card payment, making minimum payments every month.  The debts just never seem to get paid off.  Most borrowers can understand that.  Now, factor that into a much larger scale.

By now, you’re beginning to see the “crisis” occurring within the ranks of the mortgage loan servicers.  They will be reluctant to do loan mods because that means more perks for the borrowers. Extensions the servicers really aren’t interested in “affording” because they’re already swimming in borrowed time.

Couple that with the borrower’s payment history of already-missed payments BEFORE the crisis was declared and you’ve just dumped gasoline on the already burning flame.  My suggestions here, which are simple to ascertain and follow:

  1. During the crisis, check your land records EVERY WEEK to see whether or not the servicer has “manufactured” any assignments using MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.) as a means to assign, transfer or convey a mortgage loan into a REMIC trust in anticipation of having to do a foreclosure.
  2. If the assignment was done BEFORE the foreclosure and you’ve already become aware of it, use this opportunity to research your chain of title and see whether or not the information contained within the assignment is false and misrepresentative.
  3. Look up the state statutes to see what felonies were committed by asserting the false and misrepresentative information into the assignment, which was subsequently recorded into the public record and begin to document all aspects of it (who created the assignment, who executed the assignment, who notarized the assignment, who are the parties named in the assignment, who caused it to be recorded, etc.) for reference.
  4. DO NOT attempt to contact any of the parties creating the allegedly-bogus assignment. This is like tipping your hand in a high-stakes poker game.  I cannot stress that enough (as a consultant to foreclosure cases).  Telling the other side of your game plan is going to jeopardize your chances for recovery down the road.  What is important is to gather as much information as possible about all of the parties mentioned within the assignment without contacting them directly.  (There will be plenty of time for that in court-controlled discovery).
  5. Obtain a certified copy of your REMIC from the United States Securities and Exchange Commission while the ink is still fresh and you can take advantage of the time lapse created by the corona-crisis which allows you some advantage in preparing a suit for cancelling and expunging the suspect assignment.

For those of you that don’t get the “gist” of attacking documents, I have a kit available (in limited supply) online at CloudedTitles.com/shopThe C&E on Steroids!   This will give you a blueprint as to how to successfully challenge the phony documents in the land records.   It’s an 8-DVD video set plus a book containing the information you’ll need to arm yourself for the upcoming “fight” I think many of you are going to be involved in.

Why is this important?   If you’re facing foreclosure, even before the crisis, this moratorium will give you time to: (a.) think about Plan B; and (b.) act on that plan.  Even the 60-day window, which has already started ticking (courtesy of the federal government and extended by various state governments) will give you enough time to get your case files together, analyze them and more forward with retaining counsel (if you haven’t already) to “fight the good fight” because the corona-crisis itself was just not enough … we’ll be seeing another wave of foreclosures when it’s over because when it comes to reimbursement of an already-depleted money supply, the servicers (who are tasked with stealing the home) will stop at nothing to take your home away from you … and sadly, the government won’t be there to bail you out.

1 Comment

Filed under OP-ED, Securitization Issues

LESSONS LEARNED … INTER ALIA

(BREAKING NEWS — OP-ED) — The poster of this blog is not an attorney and thus, the items proffered on this post should be taken in context as court rulings and should be further interpreted by bar-licensed attorneys (past the point of your personal discretion).  The commentary posted here is not legal advice but is for your educational value only. 

The month of March certainly roared in like a lion when it comes to court cases.  There are 3 of them which are integral to learning about foreclosure defense as to the “what to do” and “what not to do”, or in the alternative, what to “take away” from the herein discussed cases versus “what is irrelevant” and unimportant in them.

FEDERAL CASE: FDCPA

The attached case is a precedent setter out of the Third U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals:

Riccio et al v Sentry Credit Inc, 3rd App Cir No 18-1463 (Mar 30, 2020)_Precedential

If anything could work to your benefit, the Appellant’s attorney’s contact information is listed within the ruling.  This case involves abusive debt collection practices prohibited under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 U.S.C. 1692 et seq.

This case appears to work to your advantage in the event some snarky foreclosure mill lawyer attempts to remove your case from state court to federal court, which allows you to amend your declaratory relief action to include “debt validation” because this case smacks in that direction, the requirements of a validation notice under the Act.  The questions in this case concerns whether “oral disputes” are also covered under the Act.

This is one of the key reasons I keep telling people, when it comes to debt collectors, you can’t take phone calls into court … or can you?

15 U.S.C. § 1692g(b) specifically demands that the debt collector needs to be notified “in writing” within the 30-day dispute period, demanding validation of the debt. This is the very issue that the Third Appellate Court appears to have considered.

This case clearly involves a third-party debt collector, whom we all hate, right?  Because the defendant (Sentry Credit, Inc.) (a.) was out of state; and (b.) involved a federal question (FDCPA), this case definitely belonged in federal district court (see my book FDCPA, Debt Collection and Foreclosures for further explanation).

The thing is … the defendant did indeed require a response from the Plaintiff in writing; however, it also provided her with “multiple options”, including calling them on the phone.  Debt collectors just love it when you call them because they can use their “power over” tactics on you to verbally beat you into submission and get you to pay.  This is why I’ve always said, “put it in writing”, no matter what.

Page 10 of this ruling clearly indicates the Court deemed that “intra-section variation strongly signals that § 1692g permits oral disputes.”   Page 11 also indicates that if you call up and dispute the validity of the debt, without putting it in writing, the debt collector can continue its collection efforts. Putting the dispute in writing (and sending it certified mail, return receipt requested) puts the debt collector on official notice and starts the clock ticking, wherein a response is due immediately.   Pages 12 and 13 bring to bear the “that dog won’t hunt” argument against overreaching in an interpretation of the law to get it to mean what you want it to mean.

Frankly, when debt collectors used to call me … I knew what my rights were and I pinned their ears back with FDCPA and challenged them on everything they said, telling them to “put it in writing” so I have something to take them to court on.  Arguing over the phone is like electricity, the path of least resistance, especially when it comes to enforcing your rights under the law.  There is no easy way out.  If you want debt collectors to do anything, maintaining your right to engage them on the phone is just as good as doing it in right because it saves you time and a stamp … well, now it appears you’re grasping at straws.

More importantly, the Third Circuit didn’t want to upstage Congressional intent when it wrote the language into the law by attempting to “correct a congressional error” and make its own law out of what Congress intended, thus “rescuing Congress from its drafting errors”.

Even more importantly, the Third Circuit also delineated the difference between a “panel ruling” and the effectiveness and superior trait of an “en banc” ruling (the entire appellate court).  It’s important to really get into those pages (18-21) and the discussion involving the differences in opinions (a real educational plus).  Stare decisis is also covered within this discussion, which, if nothing more, is good in of itself for educational enlightenment. Not only that, the Third Circuit overturned one of its previous decisions as to “oral disputes” based on the lack of FDCPA language!

In issuing the ruling, the Third Circuit clearly made it plain and simple that if you want the FDCPA to work in your favor with “no legal impediments” … then stop being lazy, quit arguing with the debt collector over the phone … and put your demands in writing so the law will firmly support you when you file an FDCPA suit!

INVESTOR WINS HOA FORECLOSURE SALE SUIT IN NEVADA!  

There’s no doubt that homeowners associations wield a lot of power.  In some states, like Nevada, after a period of time with no challenge, the parties purchasing HOA-foreclosed properties can wipe out a debt without it being considered “super priority” lien status.  Such was the case here:

Berberich v Bank of America et al, 136 Nev 10 (Mar 26, 2020)

I just love the way the Nevada Supreme Court writes its opinions … short and sweet and easy to understand.  Thus, I’m not going to be verbose here.  What this boils down to is why we have appellate and supreme courts … district court judges are always “looking out for the banks” and have a tendency to “err on the side of … ”  (I didn’t say “caution”).

What this all boils down to is chain of title.  The possessor of the property held it in title for nearly 6-1/2 years and sought declaratory relief to extinguish the deed of trust which secured a prior owner’s mortgage (if you need a full-blown course on cancellation and expungement actions, you can get it HERE!) loan.

The Plaintiff even sued MERS (which I wouldn’t have done … but) because it was a MERS-originated deed of trust.  Bank of America, N.A., which appears to have little regard for quiet title actions, especially when it comes to their alleged “skin in the game”, argued the Plaintiff’s complaint was untimely.  The Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment (meaning no triable issues of fact) and the District Court (looking out for the banks like these judges always do), ruled against the Plaintiff, who timely appealed.  Like the previous case I discussed here … again, relevance to prior case law comes up as to actions to quiet title and considering the statute’s “plain meaning”.  The importance of the plain language is clearly clarified in this ruling:

“Now taking a closer look at the statutes plain language, we clarify that the limitations period provided by NRS 11.080 only starts to run when the plaintiff has been deprived of ownership or possession of the property.

Thus, considering the statutory text as a whole, we conclude the limitations period in NRS 11.080 does not run against a plaintiff seeking to quiet title while still seized or possessed of the property.4 See Kerr, 74 Nev. at 272-73, 329 P.2d at 281 (indicating in dicta that NRS 11.080 did not apply where the plaintiff was in joint possession of the property “up to the very time when he commenced his action” to set aside a deed based on fraud and failure of consideration).

Consistent with this understanding of NRS 11.080, the limitations period is triggered when the plaintiff is ejected from the property or has had the validity or legality of his or her ownership orpossession of the property called into question. See, e.g., Salazar v. Thomas, 186 Cal. Rptr. 3d 689, 695 (Ct. App. 2015) (discussing the general rule in California, which has a statute almost identical to NRS 11.080, see Cal. Civ. Proc. Code § 318, that “whether a statute of limitations bars an action to quiet title may turn on whether the plaintiff is in undisturbed possession of the lane (quoting Mayer v. L&B Real Estate, 185 P.3d 43, 46 (Cal. 2008))).

“[M] ere notice of an adverse claim is not enough to commence the owner’s statute of limitations.”

Thus, Nevada’s highest court found that the statute does not bar a property owner who is in possession of a piece of property from bringing a quiet title action; however, the statute of limitations begins to run once the owner has notice of disturbed possession.  Since that wasn’t established (as to disturbed possession), the en banc high court reversed and remanded the case back to the district court with instructions!

U.S. BANK SCREWS MAINE HOMEOWNER … BUT WERE ALL THE DUCKS IN A ROW?

The State of Maine’s Supreme Court has come out with some pretty damning case law against the banks, especially when MERS is involved.  I will cite the most important “take aways” from this case and also get into the real “red meat” that appeared to have been missed.  Read the case first:

US Bank NA v Gordon, 2020 ME 33 (Mar 17, 2020)

First, since a REMIC was involved, no one bothered to question whether the assignment was bogus. No one questioned as to whether the appellant-homeowner was really in default, as there is enough language out there (in the mortgage loan community) to indicate that on the 25th day (or so) of every month, the servicer makes advance payments to the investors through the Trustee.  So then, the question becomes, who was harmed?  The borrower didn’t have a contract with the servicer.

No one bothered to challenge the endorsement either. As always is a precursor in the First Circuit, most court cases discuss MERS “nominee” status in the recording of the mortgage (as if MERS has some glorious, all-powerful rights vested in it because it’s an “agent”).  It also appears that the servicer may have executed a phony “ratification of assignment”, which memorialized the previous 2009 assignment.  This of course, happened RIGHT BEFORE foreclosure proceedings were commenced.  The Borrower of course, challenged standing based on his claim that the ratification was “inadmissible hearsay” and that even if admissible, it was insufficient to prove U.S. Bank’s ownership interest in the mortgage.

Page 3 clearly explains the effects of a recorded document under subheading “A”.  Not once did I see (and you can fact check me if you want to) an attempt to do a C&E on either the assignment or the ratification that was used to give more “legal effect” to the first bogus act (in 2009).  Gordon had plenty of opportunity to challenge the validity of these documents under M.R.S. Title 17A, Ch. 29. Nor did Gordon attempt to destroy the validity of these documents by civilly putting forth a cause of action under the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act (Title 5 §§ 207 and 213). Maine has existing case law that allows for documents to be challenged, cancelled and expunged … Abbott v. Treat, 78 ME 121 (1886) … and that is an OLD, WELL-ESTABLISHED CASE!

Once these two documents were challenged, Greenleaf and Saunders, Maine’s two infamous anti-MERS cases, could have then come into play here.

In other words, you can’t create and record one phony document to give the first phony document more legal force and effect when the first phony document was full of false and misrepresentative statements (constituting perjury on the land record).

There was no discussion on the authority of the MERS (potential) “robosigner” on the first 2009 assignment of mortgage.  Despite all of the colorful “resolutions” that MERS puts out into the marketplace in an attempt to give its “agency” status some sort of God-complex-like authority, its “Certifying Officers” have to have a fidelity bond and an errors and omissions insurance policy, naming them as insured.  Lacking this, the signers lack authority to do anything, except to go into a closet and play with themselves.

It also further appears that Gordon had a “legal aid” attorney representing him, which is another reason the attorney probably wasn’t aware of document challenges, which this case appears to have been totally ripe for challenging.  This ruling came out on St. Patrick’s Day … definitely NOT the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.

INTER ALIA … (the Latin term for “among other things”) …

There are other valuable lessons we’re learned through time and that is how the United States (and its individual states) respond to a crisis … like the crisis we’re currently facing.  Despite the fact that this coronavirus has not taken the toll of the Swine Flu, the Avian Flu or most certainly the Spanish Flu, it still shows us that our medical response-ability in this country is sorely lacking.

In Florida, 170 people are now dead as of the 6:00 p.m. count, with 1,334 admitted to hospitals (figure a 50% mortality rate) and 10,268 total cases opened of which 9,925 have tested positive for COVID-19 (figure a 30-40% mortality rate), so we’re looking at over 1,000 dead (just in Florida) before this is all over and we’ve not hit our “apex” yet.  There’s no flattening of any curve (and certainly not our tummies from all of the unhealthy junk food we’ll be consuming the next 30 days) any time soon.  This 30-40% of the cases reported at present (up to 3,200) are at risk of expiring on a ventilator, that they may not get to be put onto because we lack them too.  So now I’m projecting our death toll at well into the thousands before this ends.  The U.S. toll will be much worse, especially in areas of dense populations (Detroit, New Orleans, Chicago, Miami) because … well … that’s just the way things are among the “entitled”. 

The State of Florida goes into a “safer-at-home” mode statewide as of midnight tonight (the 2nd). That does not however mean, that Floridians are going to absolutely “heed” the warnings and stay put.  They’re too used to partying.  I mean, with many in the Sunshine State claiming “retired status”, what else is there to do besides having back yard parties, formal and informal get togethers, golf and boating outings, fishing excursions and hanging out in bars listening to live music, getting hammered on happy hour pricing … along with going out to eat  … Floridians’ favorite pastime and going shopping.

It was obvious we didn’t learn the meaning of social distancing, so the “nanny state” has to kick in and do its thing to remind us we need to be more responsible to each other if we’re going to continue to survive, even in the future as to further pandemics.  And I’ll concede here the Governor’s order was late in coming, but will it have any real impact if peoples’ attitudes remain the same (as if the order hadn’t come at all)?  I’m not faulting the Governor’s delayed reactions.  None of us were prepared for this eventuality and we should have been.

We still lack masks, gowns and respirators.  We still lack toilet paper (because someone out there is wiping their ass a 1,000 times a day) due to hoarding, as well as hand sanitizer (despite reports that it may not be that “sanitary” to use as a foolproof guard (like Lysol) for NOT killing the coronavirus.

I am going to go to the store and buy one bar of Castille Soap (x 4 for 4 bathrooms in my house) and no more, so that I am sure when I wash my hands, ALL of the germs are getting wiped out, as there are questions of whether the “antibacterial” soap, which is supposed to get rid of “bacteria”, which viruses are NOT, is as effective as “they” say.

Among other things, join R.J. Malloy and me on City Spotlight-Special Edition on WKDW-FM this coming Monday at 2 P.M. EDT … click HERE to get online and then click LISTEN NOW to join the broadcast (at 4 minutes past the hour).

Stay safe and stay healthy (I’m still doing the Allimax thing and I’m feeling great! allimax.us).

A BIT DISCONCERTING UPDATE … 

Stuff has been circulating about that is a bit inflammatory and disconcerting as to some folks’ deep-seated feelings about Americans (click the photo to enlarge it and click the back button to return to the article):

I can safely say that not all of the Chinese feel this way. There is a certain segment of any population that has deep-seated resentment for someone or some group of people. Take for instance, the polarization that has occurred within the two-party system in this country. Why does it occur?  Because the media and the political pundits have been successful in pushing peoples’ hot buttons. It has forced societal upheaval that will compound the issues surrounding this pandemic.

I have not heard the latest socio-economic data on the “end result” this pandemic could have on America, but if people do not become united in the effort to “stay at home” and slow down the spread of COVID-19, this pandemic will take more lives than the Civil War (1861-65) did.  For those feeling “entitled” … you are “entitled” to your opinion … and you are “entitled” to stay home and be safe as well.  Again, the larger the population center, the more likely the spread of the virus because people feel the need to be around other people.

“Gee, I just found out I have the coronavirus.  I think I’ll go visit Grandma and give it to her. Then I’ll go visit my sister and give it to her and her kids. Then I’ll go to the local shopping mall and cough all over the place and give it to as many people as I can, because I have little regard for anyone else’s life if I’m on my way out the door!”

The foregoing paragraph may sound sarcastic; however, history has shown us that there are people out there in society who behave this way.  Bottom line … if you treat the situation as that everyone you know has it … you are only safe at home.  Like Dorothy said when she clicked her heels together 3 times … “There’s no place like home.”

 

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

REMEMBER WHO THE ENEMY IS …

(BREAKING NEWS) — The author of this post is issuing this update to give you a bit more incentive to participate in the upcoming online COTA Workshop.  The information presented here is for educational purposes only; however, it’s based on years of research by this author and through discussions with attorneys who have utilized this material to their benefit. 

For those of you who are being exposed to COTA (an acronym for Chain Of Title Assessment) for the first time, or wish to intensify the study into the COTA for future use in helping others (and making a sideline income from your knowledge you’ve obtained here), let’s briefly delve into what the chain of title is and how the COTA differs from a simple “title report” issued by today’s title companies across America.

(1) Assists in identifying all known potential claimants to property

It doesn’t matter whether you’re buying a home for the first time or putting your faith in a landlord who claims to own the home he’s renting to you, it pays to understand “who’s on title”. In this day and age, more and more issues of fraudulent transfer and assignments of lien have permeated hundreds of thousands of land records, if not by crooks attempting to commit identity theft by recording false deeds, but by the very banks and secondary players “in the game” that created assignments out of thin air and caused them to be placed into the public record, all since the 2008 financial collapse!  Simply looking at the deed to a piece of property isn’t enough. The aftermath that followed the collapse (2009-2015) has been proven by this author and others to have been one giant scheme to steal property across America by some very unscrupulous sponsor-sellers on Wall Street using phony documents to get their way.  If you or this author ever attempted to do what the banks did, we’d be in jail, because the government is in bed with the banks!  The COTA helps you to identify those person(s) who say they have an interest in the property, whether by claim of ownership or by lien interest.

(2) Assists in identifying potential unknown intervening assignees

Many do not recognize the word “mesne”.  It’s pronounced “mine”.  It’s a legal term that means unidentified players within the chain of title and these players became unknown “assignees” through the use of an electronic database called Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (or “MERS”).  If you’ve read Clouded Titles, you know that MERS is currently operating under its third incorporated version, taken over in October of 2018 by the same corporate outfit that owns the New York Stock Exchange, ICE (an acronym for Intercontinental Exchange, Inc.). The mesne assignees entered the chain of title to millions of pieces of property through the use of the MERS System®.  This workshop will teach you the fundamentals of how securitization operates and just how the silent invasion of millions of phony documents entered the public recording system. It’s knowledge that has cost over 10-million Americans their homes because they didn’t have that knowledge when they took out their mortgage loans way back when.  If this workshop could save you tens of thousands of dollars in mistakes, wouldn’t that be worth it?

(3) Assists in identifying abuse to the title by lien holders & clients 

It goes without saying that millions of Americans have fallen prey to the scheme of obfuscation within the chain of title by parties that all of a sudden “claimed” an interest in any given piece of property in America simply by creating an assignment of mortgage (or deed of trust) with the intention of giving the recorded instrument legal effect for the purposes of foreclosure.  The banks and the financial industry supporting the use of MERS then proceeded to infiltrate all 3,041 public records through the use of legislation, which more than likely came into being through the use of “monetary incentives” (i.e., “the best congress money can buy”) to get legislation passed to allow a “book entry system” to permeate the land records all across America through the use (and abuse) of documents that were vague and ambiguous, which this author first discussed in the very first COTA Workshop he ever taught, as a CLE to attorneys in Texas. Now you can have access to that same information, which could help you in making what could be life and death decisions!

(4) Assists in identifying potential causes of action for use in litigation

The one thing for certain in America is that these abuses within “the system of things” has made the greater percentage of the citizens in this country litigious in one way, shape or form. The remains of those who have been foreclosed upon in the past have paved the road with bad case law because they (and their attorneys) fought with bad information, information that was passed through the legal forums throughout America by attorneys who became part of a very widespread network of what are known as foreclosure mills.  Some have fallen by the wayside, while others have only gained in strength by setting case law in their favor before most Americans (who were foreclosure victims, and their lawyers) realized what kind of legal charade was being falsely portrayed within the judicial venues throughout this country.  This author is convinced that all of this was by design, to give these foreclosure mills lots of work and as one attorney this author knows put it, “How to steal people’s homes for fun and profit.”  Sadly, 97% of all affected homeowners cut and ran, leaving the system to its own devices.  Those who fought the banks and their servicers found out the hard way that claiming “fraud” costs money … more money than the average American homeowner anticipated spending to stay in their home. There’s a right way and a wrong way to understand “the game” … and you’ll learn that in this workshop!

(5) Establishes proof of ownership in the chain of title (deraignment)

Here’s a term (deraignment) that most people don’t understand the concept of.  In this workshop, the author is going to show you not only what this term means, but how it’s applied in law!

(6) Establishes parameters for given time periods of recordation (laches)

The doctrine of laches kind of works like a ticking clock.  Many Americans have been duped into believing that once they’ve found out that they were “screwed over” by the banks, they attempted to file lawsuits against the banks and MERS, something the banks were geared up in advance to wage a winning war against these unsuspecting homeowners and their attorneys, who soon found out that there were more ways of making money than by doing simple wills and estate planning.  Welcome to the understanding of what makes a foreclosure defense lawyer tick … your paycheck in his trust account!  Laches is further explained in the COTA Workshop … which can be taken via the internet right from your very own home computer.

(7) Establishes proper document recordation value (as to sequence)

It’s not just a recorded document that makes a difference … it’s how all of the documents in the chain of title interrelate to each other.  We’re going to go into detail by showing you case studies within the COTA Workshop so you can gain an understanding of how these abuses within the chain of title occurred and how the COTA is used to formulate litigation.

(8) Establishes proper evidence to identify potential problems with title

If you had a way to identify issues within your chain of title, wouldn’t that make your understanding of future litigation more practical?  This is why so many attorneys across America have read Clouded Titles. In fact, this book (written by the author who is teaching this online COTA Workshop) was recommended to homeowners by U.S. Bankruptcy Court Trustees!  This means that the information contained within this book (and this author’s subsequent teachings) was very quickly picked up by “the system” and integrated into its database of legal knowledge.  As a bonus … for those of you taking the online COTA Workshop … you’re going to receive a complimentary copy of this book that has gotten the attention of even the federal judiciary!  Suing for everything under the sun (including the kitchen sink) is a big waste of time and money.  This online COTA Workshop will teach you the basics of understanding what the aspects of litigation are and how you, as a past, present and future homeowner, can benefit from understanding the fundamental issues within chains of title that have been affected by the schemes perpetrated by the banks and their henchmen.  This goes way beyond what title companies will ever reveal … because the title companies are “in on it”!

(9) Raises potential legal issues based on research of statutory violations

This author has written other publications which explore the universe of legal claims based on violations of statute.  Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to understand how and where to find this information … and the author will show you how in the online COTA Workshop!

(10) Raises potential legal issues based on unproven but evident fraud

Fraud! Fraud! Fraud!  That’s all this author hears homeowners bleat (like sheep to the slaughter).  Learn what the potential legal issues are without becoming a victim of them!  It’s a very expensive proposition … something this author knows could save you tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees just by your gaining an understanding of how you (as a homeowner) have been duped.

(11) Raises awareness of concern by the Preparer as to legal consideration

If you were going to help others (while making a living doing COTAs) avoid these same pitfalls, wouldn’t it be nice to know exactly HOW the author came to understand the fundamental concept of how the chain of title works?  Spending tens of thousands of dollars in litigation costs makes everyone but you (the homeowner) rich.  Why drop that big dime if you can possibly avoid it?  We’ll even be discussing quiet title and the use of declaratory judgment actions as a part of the common strategy to get to the truth of the matter involving chain of title!

(12) Raises the stakes of potential legal claims for damages

Out of these dozen reasons why you should consider taking this online COTA Workshop … if you had a clear and concise understanding of what you were up against and knew the real issues within your chain of title (or could research the chain of title for a prospective property you wish to acquire as a means of building equity), wouldn’t it be nice to know that once you’re all settled in, you’re not going to become a victim of foreclosure by some unscrupulous lender, based on those mesne assignees this author talked about in the beginning of this post?  If you knew which legal claims were more profitable than others, wouldn’t that be a good thing?

The online COTA Workshop begins February 1st (that’s this coming Saturday) … why not start out the New Year with a chunk of knowledge that can not only save you thousands of dollars in legal fees, but also give you the opportunity to make a decent living while helping others avoid the pitfalls that have cost millions of Americans dearly.

Click here to register to attend! 

In addition, if you missed something … after taking the online COTA Workshop … we’ll make these sessions available to you online so you can further your studies and pick up the nuggets you may have missed while attending the online COTA Workshop … all of which you can access FREE OF CHARGE, with your paid attendance to the workshop!

Plus, by attending the online COTA Workshop, you get a complimentary copy of the book Clouded Titles!

The webinar platform will give you a chance to ask questions at the Q&A breaks in the class too!  

Knowledge is power!

The clock is ticking … what are you waiting for?

A summons to appear in court or a notice of default?

Don’t be a victim!

Arm yourself with education!

Click here to register to attend! 

 

2 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, Securitization Issues, webinar, workshop

TEN YEARS LATER … HAS YOUR DEFINITION OF “INSANITY” CHANGED YET?

(OP-ED) — The author of this post posits these comments based on his own observations and none of this should be construed to be legal advice. For the record, the definition of “insanity” is … doing the same thing for the next 10 years you did the last 10 years expecting different results. 

Who would have ever thought that me breaking my foot would steer me down a path of moral concern, that is, America’s foreclosure crisis based on phony documents?

The Beginning of Insanity

It all began in mid-2007, when, quite by accident, I was surfing the county clerk’s website looking for details on my Texas property and discovered repetitive references to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter “MERS”).  I had no idea who MERS was until I started doing further research into this entity only to discover this electronic database had been around since at least 1999.  It didn’t even occur to me that MERS was a brainchild of the banks because at that time, there wasn’t much information out there because the lawsuits that have made the annals of American history were not made manifest yet.

I also had no idea that MERS and the banks were working hand in hand to further their “case wins” in courts by posturing MERS as some sort of legitimate “party” that had the right to foreclose on property.  I only discovered this in 2009 after I started doing serious research into security instruments and all of the accompanying documents that littered the land records across America in the wake of the financial crisis of 2008 and the previous redux of securitization, which finally reared its ugly head in a way that most Americans could understand.  It was at that time I started to develop what would later become the Chain of Title Assessment (COTA).  How the documents interrelated to each other became more important than the actual information contained within each document because a pattern of behavior became obvious which was worth doing more research on.  That pattern of behavior was recorded assignments being placed within the land records just prior to a foreclosure being commenced on any given piece of property in America.

By mid-2010, I had a specific pattern identified and was able to develop a COTA checklist based on that pattern of misbehavior.  The pattern was not just a making of the law firm or the trustees attempting to enforce security instruments.  It became obvious later on in the game that the law firms and trustees actually were doing the bidding of the mortgage loan servicers; however, that realization did not come until AFTER Clouded Titles had been published (in December of 2010).  It was not until mid-2012 that things began to surface that would lead me straight to identifying who was behind all of the chicanery that enveloped all 3,041 of our nation’s real property records.  At that point in time, I had already established a working relationship with several Texas Clerks and had lectured to their Clerks’ School, sponsored by the V.G. Young Institute for County Government.  Williamson County Clerk Nancy Rister and Williamson County government were the first to attack MERS and the servicers and third-party document mills head-on in a land record audit, which was formally released in January of 2013.

WILLIAMSON COUNTY REAL PROPERTY RECORDS AUDIT_January 29, 2013

Judging by MERS’s reaction to the audit, I knew we were onto something. MERS went out of its way to try to debunk the 179 pages of damning assertions that the mortgage loan servicers and their third-party document mills were the ones behind all of the false and misrepresentative statements we would soon come to identify in the hundreds of COTAs I would being conducting since Clouded Titles was released.  Reporters kept telling me that MERS claimed it did nothing wrong and my reply was, “Then why is everybody suing them?”

A Big Mistake

The chain of title assessment (COTA) has been referenced as a “chain of title analysis”; however, through whatever name you want to give it, the research that goes into a COTA makes it a report, an investigative piece if you will.  By the time that the mortgage loan servicers agreed with 49 states Attorneys’ General to stop production on fraudulent documents, word had spread not only to the legal community but also the public at large, that this chicanery was widespread. Foreclosure victims became outraged at the thought of being defrauded through the illicit use of the land records.  It was at about that time that the COTA hit the courts.  Reliance on a COTA in a court of law or of equity is a huge mistake as many have discovered.  Proof of that will be made manifest in this post.  By the time homeowners and their attorneys ran screaming into court about the “fraud” in the documents, MERS and the banks had already set case precedent that the contents of the documents could not be challenged because the borrowers were not “third party beneficiaries” to the assignments and therefore had no right to challenge.  In my opinion, this lame excuse of not benefitting from the assignment was a ploy to gain favor with the courts, whose judges went along with the argument because the homeowners’ attorneys had no comeback to the argument.  The big mistake however, was the misuse of the COTA and the laziness of homeowners’ counsel to conduct proper discovery.

Many litigants ran into court with their research and attempted to use it as “evidence” to prove their theories that they were defrauded by and through the use of “fraudulent documents” recorded in the public records. Once such case involving this posts’s author manifested itself in Texas on November 25, 2013, in the same year that the Williamson County Real Property Records Audit was released.  See the case below and pay attention to the references on Page 4, where this author’s name is mentioned:

Brown v BANA_Tex 5th App Dist No 05-12-01382-CV (Nov 25, 2013)

Quoting my name and my book and making references to it is not PROOF as the Appellant soon learned the hard way.

During the time span from the time this case came out, Clouded Titles had been on the market for three years and had expanded from its 254-page original version to 432 pages (not the Mayday Edition, which is the revised final version). I knew that judges and attorneys were aware of it … and not just because of its consistent use in the courts.  By that time, the Circuit Clerk of Osceola County, Florida, Armando Ramirez, was introduced to the book and was encouraged by the public to make contact with the author, which led to the commissioning of another land record investigation, which was conducted roughly 90 days AFTER the mortgage loan servicers vowed in writing never to launder the land records with fraudulent documents again, as shown below:

OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION

The author of this post, once this document was made public, was attacked by the media in what appeared to be political retribution against the Clerk of the Circuit Court (Ramirez), who was again elected to his Clerk’s post in a majority vote the following election cycle.  However, this time, MERS did not play a role in the politicizing and demonizing of the report, which had an attorney opinion letter attached to it like the Williamson County report did.  Instead, the media and foreclosure mill law firms jumped into the fray, slamming the Clerk for spending county money on a report that they maliciously called a “foreclosure audit”.  Again, misuse of the COTA.  The Report issued to the Clerk was just that … a Report outlining the abuses that continued in his own land records from June 1, 2012 to June 1, 2014, well after the mortgage loan servicers agreed to stop putting false and misrepresentative documents in the land records, where they still appear to be continuing on through today!

The Bigger Mistake

What’s even worse is that a lot of wannabe “investigators” who claimed that their research was solid proof did not pass muster in other cases.  As I will demonstrate in the upcoming Chain Of Title Assessment Workshop, to be held online on the Clouded Titles website starting on February 1, 2020, this author has been pontificating all through the ages that Chain of Title Assessments (COTAs) are NOT EVIDENCE in court, despite the ignorance of litigants and their attorneys.  In this workshop, the author will cite a U.S. Supreme Court case that clearly identifies a COTA as research developed from multiple sources and compiled into a report, which this author has constantly maintained is to be used for case development and not as evidence in of itself.  But given the desperation of homeowners, along with the mistakes made by these alleged “foreclosure rescue services” that claim the COTA is their Holy Grail in order to make a buck, these assessments are STILL NOT EVIDENCE in court, as the most recent case out of Idaho demonstrates:

Losee v Deutsche Bank Natl Trust Co, Sup Ct Idaho No 45721 (Nov 29, 2019)

Do you see the date on this case?  It was just issued the day before this author published this post! 

What in the hell are these people thinking?  If I have maintained that a 1943 United States Supreme Court ruling by this nation’s highest court mandates that COTAs cannot be relied on as evidence, why are these wannabe investigators and their litigants ignoring it?

Previously, much to my chagrin, I’ve warned attorneys NOT to waive my COTAs around in court.  One of them did in a Houston federal court and got screamed at by the judge.  This is where the joke about “judges screaming my name and it wasn’t during sex” evolved from. (“Who’s Dave Krieger????!!!!!!!!)

One other attorney in Michigan was forced to let a judge see the COTA (by the judge’s own insistence) because the attorney kept referring to the document while making arguments in court.  Once the judge read the document (assumedly during his lunch break), he got an education, even though it was still NOT being offered as evidence, and ordered the parties to settle the case as he stated, “neither one of you are going to like the way I rule on this one!”   In the end, the bank got the house back and the homeowners got their money back and then some.  This still does not mean that the COTA is evidence unless the material within the COTA is vetted and relied upon by expert witnesses or utilized to craft discovery to go after the underbelly of the other side’s arguments.

I beg of you … please do not continue to misuse these reports.  These reports are meant as investigative research and proper discovery must be utilized to vet the research.  Simply walking into court and waving these reports around screaming “Fraud This!” and “Fraud That!” will get you nowhere.

To get a real idea of HOW TO do a Chain of Title Assessment (COTA) on your own, where you can get a real education, I am offering the first online COTA Workshop on Saturday, February 1st (2020), in 4, 2-part segments, from 9:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.  Here’s the schedule of the online classes:

Sessions 1 and 2, Saturday, February 1, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 3 and 4, Saturday, February 8, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 5 and 6, Saturday, February 15, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

Sessions 7 and 8, Saturday, February 22, 2020; 9:00 a.m. – 1:00 p.m. (EST)

I have revised the COTA to take the purpose of the workshop out of the “business model mode” and craft it into the “consumer mode” for the purposes of giving you a basic education into the realm of document identification and research.  Click the following link to leave your email address in the blank space provided and the Registration Form will be emailed to you.  Once you are enrolled in all four sessions, you will be able to access the online workshop presentation (as it will be recorded for future use) on the Clouded Titles website!

The Definition of Insanity Needs to Change in Your World!

I can tell you with a certainty that mine has!  In fact, I use COTA research to make money in my real estate investing.  Had homeowners going through foreclosure been thinking about Plan B instead of trying to fight the inevitable losing court battle ratios, America might have had better case law than what it has now.  With the banks creating as much negative case law against homeowners and as tilted as the system is against borrowers who don’t pay their mortgage payments, it’s time to change your mindset and use the COTA to your advantage.  My workshop strategies have now shifted into the realm of COTA use to make money to survive instead of defending your home in a losing battle.

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, workshop

FANNIE, FREDDIE AND MERS: RECIPE FOR COLLUSION TO SCREW AMERICA!

(OP-ED) — The author of this post is a consultant to trial attorneys and author of Clouded Titles – Mayday Edition, which exposed the corruption in banking in tandem with darker forces within the U.S. Government to fuel the largest housing grab America has ever seen.  The opinions expressed here are his own and do not constitute legal advice or seek to draw and conclusions of law. 

There has been a recent unveiling of sorts that discusses the conflict between the two GSE’s (government-sponsored entities) and MERS, which clearly shows who in fact spearheaded the push to turn the secondary residential mortgage market into a lying, conniving, deceiving bunch of thieves that have promulgated the use of electronic promissory notes (“eNotes”), which are uploaded into an electronic database called Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter “MERS”), which, at its conception, was owned by MERSCORP, Inc.   Both of these entities were Delaware corporations based in Reston, Virginia.  But no longer.

After being merged into MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. in February of 2012, nearly seven years into the eRegistry (the database itself, which operates electronically to store information on the mortgage loans; e.g. the note and the security instrument), MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. was acquired by Intercontinental Exchange, Inc. (hereinafter “ICE”), which also owns the New York Stock Exchange.  All of MERSCORP’s Reston, Virginia operations were moved to ICE’s data centers in Mahwah, New Jersey, where they exist today.

Collectively, MERS members pay $7.95 every time they enter a transfer of the eNote and its accompanying paperwork in the MERS® System.  Herein lies the rub.  The banking industry, in at least one letter to a judge (in 2009, in Florida), has admitted that once the paper “notes” are uploaded into the MERS® System and become “eNotes”, they don’t need the paper notes anymore and thus, they brag about shredding them.  On another note, there are “archives” all over the country that the megabanks claim hold the originals of the notes and mortgages, available within a reasonable time frame (to be retrieved) as a mortgage foreclosure case develops and the documents are called for.  But is that really the case?  What if these documents were actually “downloaded” from the MERS® System, printed out, and claimed to be (by the lender’s/servicer’s) the originals?

eNotes versus the Uniform Commercial Code (the “U.C.C.”), UETA and e-Sign

This recent article, authored by lawyers within the law firm of Dorsey & Whitney LLP, unveiled an eAlert which seeks to address potential issues which I thought might be useful for you and your attorney to know, or should they?  Due to the nature of the banks and their attorneys to play games with us and misdirect us at every turn with their propaganda … this article, whose link can be found here …

Potential Issues for Warehouse Providers with Electronic Mortgage Notes | Dorsey & Whitney LLP – JDSupra

… could be one major misdirect, according to our UCC guru Bob Janes, author of SHELLGAME MERS, Contrived Confusion, which can be found on the Clouded Titles website!

Here’s what Bob has to say about this article:

This paper shows an ignorance of negotiable instrument law and its interaction with Art 9 of the UCC. It appears to be a continuation of the effort to give appearance (operative word) of merit to the MERS system and the mortgage finance industries desire to profit by ignoring existing law and creating an sham appearance that might be able to help take people’s homes in future foreclosures without adherence to applicable law.

Secured interests under Art 9 are trumped (or is that a dirty word now?) by Art 3.  Only the person entitled to enforce the negotiable instrument has a right in the collateral (mtg or dot).  Whether the name of that person is in the chain of title for the mtg/dot is not important. 200 yr old common law, now codification by 9-203(g) are in unison: the collateral pledged to secure payment of the debt under a negotiable instrument always belongs the person entitled to enforce the debt pursuant to Art 3 of the UCC.  This paper does not address nor even encourage that the new e system design compile factual information necessary to determinations of enforcement right under the negotiable instrument law of Art 3.  The paper’s discussion of ‘perfection’ and ‘controller’ are irrelevant to determination of enforcement right under Art 3.  The paper shows no understanding of the importance of ‘possession’ of the note under negotiable law nor how and when possession is connected to the right to enforce the note.

The paper’s discussion of ‘holder in due course’ (“HDC”) also reflects the author’s ignorance or desire to misstate law.  The many elements of status as holder in due course are not addressed, nor is the system of maintaining eNote or eVault  requisite information/proof of the legal elements necessary to the right to enforce the note.   HDC is a subset of holders under the UCC.  Any person entitled to enforce the note pursuant to 3-301 (holder, nonholder in possession with rights of a holder, a person not in possession but with overwhelming evidence of having been the holder or nonholder entitled to enforce when the note was lost, stolen or destroyed) has priority rights in the mtg/dot regardless paperwork ‘perfection’ under Art 9.

The paper does not address the subservient role of Art 9 to negotiable instrument law and enforcement rights of Art 3.  This paper neither discusses the article 3 requirements for a person to be a holder in due course, nor does it demonstrate that information gathered and retained by the e-system will be useful in determining who has a right to enforce the note, and thereby, to enforce the mtg/dot.

Whether or not the enote/evault system becomes a reality, the homeowner defense against negligent or fraudulent foreclosure remains unchanged as long as the UCC remains as currently in the statutes of every state.  Merit requires discussion of the Art 3 detail necessary to establish enforcement rights in the note, and this paper is without demonstrated knowledge or effort to address the Art 3 requirements, policies, etc.

What do I think of this paper?  Not much.

The Continued Screw Job! 

So you see, Fannie and Freddie continue to peddle their toxic paper into our economy, further screwing with chains of title all across the country with every property their servicers stole on the back end of the foreclosure, which ended up getting transferred to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. You only see these two hoodlums on the back end of foreclosures, as they certainly wouldn’t rear their ugly head in the middle of one for fear of giving the government a black eye … and we wouldn’t want that now, would we?

It’s bad enough we have politicians polarizing America and screwing up everything they touch!  They don’t have the decency to quit interfering with the housing market by continuing to allow Fannie and Freddie to exist.

What’s worse, judges don’t really care about the UCC and are quick to misapply it.  Those who aren’t smart about what the UCC says (and turn their lamebrain lawyers loose in the courts repeating this bank’s diatribe) are sure to lose.  Yet we keep going to banks that don’t portfolio their own loans and keep doing business with them.  That’s on us!

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED, Securitization Issues