Tag Archives: mortgage

U.S. SUPREME COURT SLAMS OBDUSKEY’S DOOR SHUT!

(BREAKING NEWS — OP-ED) — The author of this post is a consultant to attorneys on chain of title matters and issues involving “the system of things”.  Please read the attached ruling and take from it what is necessary for your educational benefit.

While this ruling was not expected to be a total slam dunk of “per curiam” nature, it sent a hard message to U.S. consumers regarding the collection of a debt versus the enforcement of a security interest.  Obduskey brought suit in the 10th Circuit on matters involving the FDCPA (debt collection) against a law firm that was simply enforcing a security interest.

See the High Court’s ruling here: Obduskey v McCarthy & Holthus LLP, 586 U.S. ___ (2019)

It’s a 12-page ruling (with syllabus).  It didn’t take long after oral arguments to come with this diatribe either, which brings me back to another major issue …

HOW is a trustee in a non-judicial setting supposed to enforce a security instrument?  Foreclose on it.

A trustee cannot enforce a security instrument if the chain of title documents are NOT in order.  In other words, if the opinion says the foreclosure mill law firms can simply declare they’re enforcing security instruments, when the end result will be to foreclose and sell the property to pay a sum certain (a debt), then this is all about “language” and our understanding of it.  If we can’t use the FDCPA to back our claims, as of this ruling, then there is only one other strategy left to resort to: attack on the chain of title!

IT’S ALL ABOUT THE CHAIN OF TITLE

You signed a security instrument at closing.  No one held a gun to your head.  In non-judicial states, foreclosure is conducted by enforcing the security instrument and the promissory note you signed is irrelevant.  Whoever has the authority to enforce the deed of trust is empowered to do so.

The problem is … in the process of “patting themselves on the back”, the non-judicial “trustees” attempting to enforce the security instrument had to rely on the instrument itself … playing through the chain of title … through potential suspect bogus assignments … in an effort to “give” themselves authority to foreclose which would normally be considered ultra vires (without authority).

One such case that Al West and I will be teaching at the upcoming Foreclosure Defense Workshop in Las Vegas (April 6-7, 2019), is a case out of California that has great instructional value … a case that went sideways for the REMIC … a case where the foreclosure was declared “unlawful” by the appellate court … AND REVERSED!

More importantly, the assignment was attacked!  The superior court judge (of course, as expected) tossed the whole matter out, forcing the homeowner to appeal him.  The appellate court ruled that the ASSIGNMENT WAS VOID!  As a result of the assignment being VOID (NOT VOIDABLE), the case was remanded as REVERSED as to the foreclosure; REVERSED as to the chain of title assignment attack; and REVERSED as to slander of title, because all of the issues weren’t presented properly and thus, weren’t addressed properly by the lower court.  The instructional value of this case is huge: Gauna v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA

We will be addressing the specific issues necessary to attack the assignment at the upcoming workshop!  We still have seats available.  And just when you thought there was no end in sight, we get an instructional unpublished opinion that validates the Cancellation & Expungement Actions that Al West has been using the past several years to wipe out security instruments!  Now you get to see Al West share this information in a live event in Las Vegas (in a 2-day power-packed informational workshop).

In fact, several attorneys from around the country are attending.  What does that tell you?   Maybe you should be there too?

See the attached Registration Form for details: FDW REGISTRATION FORM_LAS VEGAS_2019

Want to see a schedule of what’s being taught, click this link: FDW 2019 WORKSHOP_LAS VEGAS_SYLLABUS

The new book is out … and will only be available to workshop attendees:

We are NOT selling this book online, because it contains information that (by itself) would be like giving a baby a stick of dynamite with a short fuse!

If you think we can’t use this material to potentially get foreclosure mill attorneys disbarred, think again!

If you think we can’t use this material to attack notaries in a more effective manner, think again!

There are very few seats left at this workshop … we are almost sold out!  We cannot expand the room to accommodate more attendees.  You have little time to waste.  We will allow you to bring your attorney to the event at the “COUPLES RATE”.  Contact us through the CLOUDED TITLES website email link (click on the TITLE) for more information about space availability!

We will show you WHY this attack plan (on steroids) works and why it has worked in the past (when properly litigated)!

THIS STUFF WORKS IN ALL 50 STATES!  

WE DO NOT USE IT IN FEDERAL COURT!

WE SHOW YOU HOW TO KEEP IT OUT OF FEDERAL COURT!

WE SHOW YOU WHY JUDGES WILL HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION TO IT!

See you there!

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, Securitization Issues, workshop

THE ARROGANCE OF BANKS!?

(OP-ED) — The author of this post is not an attorney and none of this should be construed as legal advice but is put forward for educational purposes only. 

No matter what defensive (or offensive) strategy is seemingly employed by homeowners (as borrowers), not only do we still get the same ‘ol, same ‘ol from bank attorneys (who actually represent the mortgage loan servicer and not the owner of the note themselves) as to their defamatory conjecture from “Your Honor, they (meaning the borrower) just want a free house!” … we still get the continued misrepresentation of the facts in a foreclosure action, whether it be judicial or non-judicial in nature.

In a judicial scenario, the arrogance is blatant. The attorney files the foreclosure action (generally employed by a foreclosure mill that gets paid a low winning bid dollar amount) and puts all of the same, standard “trash talk” about the homeowner (as the borrower), claiming the borrower is in default and that it (the client) is entitled to enforce the security instrument.  This isn’t personal really.  It’s a numbers game and if you’re a borrower who hasn’t made his payments in ages, it does not necessary mean that the burden of proof shifts to you, just because it’s your home and you’ve been served with papers which, nine times out of ten, contain pleadings that have notably false and misrepresentative statements contained within them.  In a judicial state, it’s still up to the alleged claimant-Plaintiff to prove its case or go home. This is why the banks want everything changed to non-judicial in nature, so they don’t have to work so hard to steal people’s homes.

Instead, the borrower opts to defend his position by putting forward an answer and affirmative defenses to the Plaintiff’s assertions.  The very act of this filing and anticipated response immediately gives the court jurisdiction to hear the matter before it (with an assigned case number and recorded lis pendens).  At the point of the recording of the lis pendens, the borrower’s title is slandered (not the filing of the case with the applicable court).  It is the notice of lis pendens that gives the world constructive notice of the proceedings against the property because it is the security instrument that the Plaintiff seeks to enforce.  However, in a judicial state, the Plaintiff must possess the Note, or in the alternative, sufficiently demonstrate that it had the note, but lost it, and made every effort to find it, but couldn’t.  Instead of looking for the note (or dummying one up out of nowhere like we know they do) and presenting a complete case, the arrogant bank and its lawyer press forward anyway and prey on the emotion of the court, backed by the reasoning that since they filed a complaint to foreclose, they must be the lender, right?

Generally, when the Plaintiff can’t produce the note, it produces an assignment of mortgage, which is generally “manufactured” by the mortgage loan servicer’s employees in favor of the servicer.  Half the time, the assignment includes the language “together with the note”, which, if MERS is involved, is a physical impossibility because MERS cannot transfer something it does not own.  This makes the assignment false and misrepresentative.  Instead of questioning the tactics of the servicer, on many an occasion, the banks’ own attorneys just take it and run with it, or even worse, are complicit in its manufacture!  This makes it even worse because the bank’s attorney (and law firm) would be suborning perjury, which, the last time I checked, was a felony.  It’s even worse when they try to rely on the assignment to steal the house.  It is the INTENT that is made known when the misrepresentations within the assignment are orally pontificated upon the court by the bank’s attorney in his arguments … thus, the arrogance of the bank is transferred to its lawyer, who can then claim reliance on the document because the attorney (or the “cover lawyer”, different from the attorney who filed the original pleadings) is now at greater than “arm’s length”position from the transaction and thus will claim plausible deniability (as in “I had no idea, Your Honor.”)

In a non-judicial setting, the scenario is much more deceitful.  If the borrower doesn’t stop the proceeding with something factual that can be proven in court, followed by a temporary restraining order, it is assumed that whoever commences a foreclosure action against the property is going to get their wish because going to court is not required in deed of trust states, except in certain cases, which is why the arrogant banks keep trying to lobby legislatures to change their method of enforcing security instruments to non-judicial, because all non-judicial actions do not require a court’s approval and thus all foreclosure actions are deemed legal unless proven otherwise.  This too is a numbers game of greater proportions because most homeowners in deed of trust states do not have access to competent foreclosure defense attorneys because “the system of things” does not warrant a board specialized attorney (in real property law or foreclosure defense) to come forward and shut the door on the foreclosure.  Most attorneys in deed of trust states really don’t know how to defend against foreclosures but they sure know how to structure a business model to take a retainer, followed by monthly payments, making their newly-found client their newly-created annuity payment.  This is great for business because it boosts cash flow.  But, it doesn’t nothing for the homeowner (as the borrower) unless the homeowner has something in the chain of title worth arguing.

Such is the case in South Carolina, where a MERSCORP attorney has allegedly testified under oath (in a deposition) that MERS cannot act for a “non-functional entity” (which means an entity that has gone out of business and years later, all of a sudden uses MERS (through the actions of the servicer’s own employees or another third party) to cover up the chain of title and bring the note and mortgage or deed of trust from the originating, out-of-business lender, to the present tense, in an attempt to allow whatever party comes in with a claim against the property, to foreclose on it.  Apparently, this same testimony allegedly worked on  a case in New Mexico as well, allegedly.  I use the word “allegedly” here because there’s no attached “oral transcript” or “order” from either court to validate the claims made by attorney Jeff Barnes, who goes into court pro hac vice (a guest of the court, using the resident attorney’s bar license) to help the homeowner (who is paying major dollars to both Barnes and the resident lawyer) get out of their foreclosure jam.

I find it odd that a post, dated October 29, 2018, on Barnes’s website, would make such statements without completing the grandstanding against MERS by actually including “hard evidence” in the form of a transcript or order, don’t you think?  In the New Mexico case, it wasn’t a slam dunk, however, it appears, without verification, that most of the borrower’s affirmative defenses would be sustained based on this new admission of MERSCORP’s own lawyer.  If one wanted to really make themselves appear “credible” with their “victory lap”, don’t you think one should brandish the sword they used as the weapon of choice?  (I put this in here for you Game Of Thrones fans!)  But, seriously, wouldn’t that make logical sense?   So we could read HOW the defeat occurred?

But wait, that would make the grandstanding (to get more business obviously) more plausible and less arrogant, right?  We can’t have THAT now, can we?  We need to further our business model and leave borrowers in the dark, only to surmise that somewhere out there, a MERSCORP attorney was indeed deposed and testified that his client has no right to transfer the note (something I’ve been saying for years) because MERS has no interest in it.  Factually, even if such an order or transcript WERE included, do you really think most borrowers would know HOW to take what they’ve learned from it and apply it to their own scenario?  Not hardly.  Not in today’s court systems.

It should be noted that the claim was made (in Barnes’s website post) that a deposition was taken, which means the only way you’re going to get damning information to shut down the banks’ arrogance, it to get damning information by conducting a deposition.  This is where the rubber meets the road with foreclosure defense attorneys because great discovery wins cases and if your attorney is “lacking” when it comes to getting the right set of facts out of a deposition, you’ve lost not only your home but all those financial resources you could have used to move onto PLAN B. Pro se litigants rarely, if ever, conduct a deposition, let alone a proper and complete one.

In sum, you’re either going to fight the bank’s arrogance with provable facts or you’re not.  The system of things supports more than just an affirmative defense against the bank’s lawyer because of the misrepresentations in his pleadings.  It supports a bar complaint.  I don’t see too many foreclosure defense lawyers putting forward bar complaints based on false and misrepresentative pleadings from foreclosure mill attorneys, do you?  (This is why we focus more these days on “the system of things” and how that plays out!) 

And somehow, the good ‘ol boy network seemingly continues to survive.

NOTE: If you want to hear multiple scenarios explained about why our voting system may be all f**ked up (especially in Florida with the recent negative spotlight put on it), listen to Dave Krieger tonight (6 p.m. EST) on WKDW-FM’s City Spotlight – Special Edition, just by clicking on this link and then clicking on LISTEN NOW!  Joining Dave and co-host R.J. Malloy as their guests are North Port, Florida City Commissioner Jill Luke and outgoing City Commissioner Linda Yates.

4 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

UPDATE: BRUCE JACOBS IS FIGHTING BANK OF AMERICA!

UPDATE FROM MIAMI —

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

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

 

See the following link:

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

NOTE:  Bruce has asked me to repost this!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

4 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 10

(OP-ED, first posted: September 28, 2018) —

The writer of this rather lengthy and final post in this particular series is a paralegal, researcher and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  Any use of the theories or ideas suggested in this post is entirely at your discretion and will probably result in disaster without the proper legal help, which you are responsible for vetting.  I am not an attorney referral service either. 

HOW TO BANKRUPT ANY COUNTY IN AMERICA IN TEN EASY STEPS

Oh, you seriously thought I was going to go there?   I just did that to freak anyone out on the “other side” that was waiting for me to say such a thing so they could hold it against me in some way.  My Jewish attorney friend used to talk loudly in his leased office space because the walls were paper thin and he knew the trucking company on the other side of the wall could hear him, so he’d make statements about putting that trucking company out of business, just out of spite.  That attorney is (to this day) still one of my good friends in the legal community.  And he knows what personal injury is (especially after getting a large settlement out of a major soft drink manufacturer).  I would say that the entire summation of this 10-part series is not “pissing in the wind”.

I have a large network of attorneys across the country that are bracing for the upcoming storm.  I will not tell you their names because they are behind the scenes getting ready to do their part to make “the system of things” manifest itself.

As one Expert Witness attorney put it to his clients (paraphrased in the simplest terms):

“My testimony will be considered evidence of the statutory violations that were created by the assignments (of mortgage, deed of trust).  If the homeowner’s attorney ties the statutory elements together with the facts my testimony provides, then the Plaintiff (lender, servicer, etc.)’s attorney will be acting as an accessory to the Plaintiff client’s crime.  Not only will the acts be considered criminal statutory violations, they will also be considered ethics code violations.  All of the above is calculated with the hope that it terminates the litigation in the homeowner’s favor.”

FIRST AND FOREMOST EVIDENCE: THE PUBLIC RECORD    

While the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION was only a report issued to the Clerk of that particular Circuit Court, it was one of only a few reports that were ever generated at the behest of a Clerk, Register, Recorder, etc. in the entire country (out of over 3,000 counties). It is sad when only a handful of studies were done and what happened following the release of those reports only scratched the surface of “the system of things”:

Southern Essex District, Massachusetts (2011) — Following the release of that report, a pro bono effort by Marie McDonnell, Register of Deeds John O’Brien’s office got a bunch of media attention, which subsequently brought visits by local bank counsel, threatening to sue the county.  Nothing ever came of it (perhaps due to Mr. O’Brien’s response to the attorneys, “Good! Bring it! We get discovery!”), but to this day, all potentially robosigned documents are rejected from recording in that office.

Guilford County, North Carolina (2011) — Attorney Lynn Szymoniak assisted Register of Deeds Jeff Thigpen bring a spreadsheet forward of known DOCX robosigners, which sparked public awareness in that county.  Sadly, the entire examination was overshadowed by the FBI’s investigation of DOCX and eventual prosecution of Lorraine M. Brown, its president.  Thigpen retained a law firm to file suit against Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. and its parent, MERSCORP; however, the case went nowhere because the court determined that the Register of Deeds did not have a private right of action.

San Francisco, California (2012) — Assessor-Recorder Phil Ting, acting on behalf of the City and County of San Francisco, retained Aequitas Compliance Solutions, Inc. to conduct a study of his land records, which revealed a plethora of suspect activity regarding the recording of assignments, followed by suspicious pre-foreclosure recording activity.  In a scant 21-page Report, the results infuriated Ting to the point of frustration.  After a media blitz and a lot of YouTube activity, Mr. Ting decided his land records were garbage and decided not to seek re-election. While the report was California-specific, it did make reference to a report issued by two attorneys from the Florida AG’s Economic Crimes Division, which later resulted in those two attorneys, Teresa Edwards and June Clarkson, being forced out of their positions.

Williamson County, Texas (2013) — County Clerk Nancy Rister commissioned a study of robosigned documents culled from hundreds of files in the recorded database of the public records in that county, to find hundreds of suspect issues contained within assignments and powers of attorney that were drafted and recorded by law firms that conducted foreclosures of residents there.  The 179-page report, done by DK Consultants LLC, caused a raft of media attention, followed by a nearly full page rebuttal by the then-CEO of MESCORP Holdings, Inc. Bill Beckmann, claiming MERS did nothing wrong, even though MERS was at the center of attention in the audit.  Several attorneys named in the report visited the Clerk’s office and made threatening comments to her staff but nothing ever came of it.  Williamson County joined in a suit with Travis and Nueces County in Texas against both MERS entities which went nowhere.  Sadly, the attorneys bringing the suit claimed MERS was responsible for the recordings, which the federal judge deemed was not.

Osceola County, Florida (2014) — If anything came from this Report, it was a media firestorm, apparently baited by the Osceola County Sheriff’s Department, spoon-fed to all of the Clerk (Hon. Armando Ramirez)’s political enemies, who made use of the information to smear the Clerk in the media.  Despite the efforts to make everyone involved “front page news”, the Clerk was re-elected to his position.  The FBI refused to investigate the contents of the Report, which was not an indictment, after talking to the Osceola County Sheriff’s detectives handling their end of the investigation into the Report’s contents, stating in a one-page release that they could find no victims. The State’s Attorney who was first presented with the Report, declined to investigate any of it and subsequently was not re-elected following a scandal involving Ashley Madison’s website. The Osceola County Sheriff did not seek re-election either.

Seattle, Washington (2015) — McDonnell Property Analytics was tasked with conducting a review of mortgage documents and assignments in a post-Bain decision by the Washington State Supreme Court.  Page 29 of that Report clearly stated that numerous MERS assignments contained “false statements, misrepresentations, and omissions of material fact”, noting the violative statutes, which we would sincerely entertain in taking out adversarial opponents in future skirmishes in the Pacific Northwest.  After much media attention and public outcry to the Seattle City Commission, the heat died down and things appear headed back to the status quo.  Sadly, until the bankers are imprisoned, they continue to own Washington State. (… and you know I’m not lying here!)

All of these “protectors of the public record will go down in the annals of American history” as having made a dent in “the system of things” as exposed, with no finality. I believe that “the system of things” was not approached in the right way.  The parties involved (the Clerks, etc.) in some instances, were told they didn’t have a private right of action.  So what was missing?

THE LACKING COMPONENT: STATUTORY APPLICATIONS OF VIOLATIONS

What was contained in the assignments discovered in each of the foregoing reports was “evidence” that had to be discovered and never was.  Any homeowner in America can run into court and waive their assignment around in the judge’s face and call it a fraudulent document and the judge will simply ignore them because nothing in the document was proven false or misrepresentative to the point of opening up “Pandora’s Box”.  As long as homeowners are willing to play the “delay game”, just to keep things on the level for their comfort zones, nothing will happen.  Eventually, they’ll be out of their home at the hands of a corrupt system.  If they behave like Martin Wirth, they’ll end up dead at the hands of a corrupt system.  You see, “the system of things” “circles the wagons” when it’s attacked.  Just like Custer at the Little Big Horn (and we know what happened to him).

However, the missing components here (referring to the expert witness’s foregoing statements) are not deemed to be “third-party beneficiary” intimations, which all courts to date have placed credence in so homeowner’s “don’t get a free house”.  We’re not even going there.  We are talking about statutory violations of law here, which result in ethical violations by the bank’s attorneys.  If the statutory law exposes the fraud in the public record and it is brought forward into a court proceeding, the bank’s attorney has the option to recant all of his pleadings and oral statements made to the court, because all of those statements make him an accessory to the statutory violations.  Once the bank’s attorney has stepped into the realm of statutory violations (through felony perjury applications, fraud on the court, etc.), that attorney is now subject to disciplinary action by the state’s bar, which is exactly where the ethical violations are going to be lodged, thanks to those bar mandates previously discussed on these posts.  Every state has some sort of statutory application to prosecute false and misrepresentative statements in the public record, it’s just that it’s never been postured in such a way to make it part of the court record.

THE LACKING COMPONENT: ETHICAL VIOLATIONS

Once a record has been created of all of the evidence and testimony in court, the expert witness attorney files a formal complaint to that state’s bar against the bank’s lawyer, alleging ethical violations, which now affects the errors and omissions insurance policy.  The bank’s lawyer is now tempted to file a claim to get his attorney’s fees paid for in the bar disciplinary committee hearing(s); however, if the E & O carrier should become aware of what the attorney is involved in, it would certainly become “risk averse” and deny paying for any of his legal representation, which means it has to come out of his own pocket, which could get really expensive.  At a minimum, he risks suspension.  At most, he risks disbarment.  How is he going to pay off all of his student loans then?   It’s a benefit to the homeowner, because any subsequent law firm will be aware of the case and will run from it, unless it wants to wind up playing out the same scenario as “the system of things” unfolds on them too.

THE LACKING COMPONENT: JUDICIAL SYSTEM CHALLENGES

The judge hearing the foreclosure case should “do the right thing” and hold an evidentiary hearing (see Part 7, the M & T Bank v. Smith case).  Any evidentiary hearing, properly conducted, based on all of the evidence, would preclude any action against the judge and force a settlement.  While this would be an obvious savings to the homeowner, most judges ignore the claims of misrepresentation because they have agendas.  It is these “agendas” that, if not applied, would force an onslaught of suits in that state, tying up the foreclosures dockets for years, because all homeowners would have to do is claim they’ve been wronged and ask for a free house.  We know that is not going to happen; however, “the system of things” will do more good if it is correctly applied in getting that “judge with an agenda” removed from the bench because he (or she) is complicit in a fraud and allowed it to happen, bringing exposed risk against the county and its treasury.

Besides going after the judge’s bond, we see filings to the judicial review panel, which will have the entire record given to the state bar against the lawyer in that proceeding. Without a bond, the judge cannot sit on the bench.  End of career.  End of legacy.  Maybe, even end of pension.   If it’s a senior judge that’s been pulled out because he already has a pension and a nice nest egg, personal judgments against him as the result of a proper proceeding may haunt him for the rest of his life, with not only a personal “stain” on his legacy, but any serious criminal applications here could pierce the sovereign immunity and put him squarely into a criminal proceeding, where he’d face prison time. Imagine the supreme court of any state being tied up in felony allegations?   Think West Virginia!   It can happen and you’ll see it happening when “the system of things” is fully unveiled.   You see, judges are not exempt from prison and an eventual stained legacy, despite what they think of themselves and their so-called “immunity”.

Pompous shits!  And we trusted them to do the right thing.

And let’s not forget the county who employs the judge.  They have a treasury.  Most of them are self-insured and have to answer to voters, who would be pissed at them if the treasury was drained due to multiple damage settlements. This is why state tort claims actions were developed.  Now, imagine a 1,000 people, all affected by the same law firm, all having similarly-situated false and misrepresentative assignments, all coming after the same entities (at once) who got them kicked to the curb by the same county judges.  It really only takes one judge to be removed from the bench under the shadow of felony behavior to send a message to everyone else in “the system of things” that we know how to play the game “for real” now.

If the state bar does nothing to bring a resolution to the attorney’s ethical violations, then the insurance companies will, indirectly.  No insurance carrier is going to insure an attorney with a bad record of being an accessory to a crime.  End of paycheck.  Defaulted student loans.  End of credibility (e.g., David J. Stern).   No one has gone after all his money … yet. Any law firm relying on his assignments?  Watch out!  Your time is coming.

And let’s not forget how the law firm is going to suffer at the hands of this behavior.  No E & O insurance carrier will write professional liability on a stained past history of illicit behaviors.  End of law firm.  Oh sure, they can try and just throw another firm together and keep doing the same thing until they end up disbarred like Stern; however, the bad behavior follows the principals too … and any law firm subsequently taking the case in chief.

And let’s not forget the mortgage loan servicers, third-party debt collectors and document mills creating these phony assignments, or in the alternative, relying on them.  They answer to either the departments of banking and finance or the department of insurance.  The states have risk pools (of money). Imagine tapping into that pile of cash!

There are bonds and professional liability insurance policies in force that cover the behaviors of the foregoing entities.  When they step into this fray however, “the system of things” may end up coming after the individuals and the supervisors that gave them the platform to create these phony assignments and put them all in prison.  How many “Linda Greens” would you imagine would end up there … or should?   As with what didn’t happen in Osceola County, “the system of things” would be more persuasive in this case, because of testimony, affidavits, a paper trail and a transcript of the proceedings.

The system of things put “safeguards” in place to insure that the public is not harmed by illicit behaviors.  Notice I used the word “insure”?   There’s a reason for that.  When insurance companies refuse to pay for bad behavior, someone has to … be it the state, the county or the individuals responsible for stealing private property.

YOUR ATTORNEY HAS TO DO HIS JOB!  THAT’S ALL! 

If anything needs to be understood (and stressed) here, it’s that if you’re paying an attorney to do his job, he should do his job. Not play the “delay game” with you.  There are attorneys out there that will do their jobs.  We need one that has enough sense to put an expert witness attorney on the stand in a formal hearing setting and examine him (with a prepared set of questions) like any other witness on the stand.  We don’t need him jumping up and down and screaming at the judge either.  Remember, he has to appear before the same judge again (that is, if the judge is still a seated judge).   Once this takes place, your attorney will become fully aware of the statutory and ethical violations that have occurred. Sadly, he now is mandated by his state bar to report them under the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.  Whether he does it is irrelevant.  The expert witness attorney will do the reporting to the appropriate authorities.  If they don’t act, then we hit up their insurance carriers!

Attorneys do get perturbed with “the system”.  In our previous segment (Part 8), we explored the suit filed against the Oregon State Bar, a public corporation.  Even the state bars should be held to a higher standard and from time to time, refreshed with new blood from humble folks not so consumed with their power and their copious attitudes.  State bars have a treasury too, if you get my drift. Unfortunately, many attorneys who say they’re “fighters” may try to talk you out of opening “Pandora’s Box” in lieu of a loan modification.  That, in of itself, is a trap against homeowners. But again, it’s all about the money, right?

CALL TO ACTION: SENSE OF URGENCY, WHETHER YOU’RE IN YOUR HOME OR NOT

I’m not going to do the “Alex Jones” thing and tell you to harass anyone, “push back” or man your “battle stations”.  Just the opposite.  Wise as serpents, harmless as doves.  Plan the trap. Set the trap.  Spring the trap.  Catch the prey.  Hunger Games: “Remember who your enemy is.” as you see Katniss Everdeen with her bow and arrow, going after a squirrel or a rabbit.  It’s a single and precise strike at the target.  In this “system of things”, you have multiple targets to choose from.  HOW you play that game is up to you.  You are not limited by your tactical ammo.  You do however, have to use your due diligence and wisdom to determine which target to go after and plan the trap.  The bait is already there (what’s in the public record) in the form of documents (assignments) that violate statute.  It doesn’t matter about the “third-party beneficiary” argument.  The statute says what the statute says. It means what the state legislature intended it to mean, no matter what the bank’s attorney argues.  Once that argument starts and the trap is sprung, the bank’s attorney can only do one thing: recant his pleadings and oral statements and motion for the case to be dismissed.  In the alternative, he risks prosecution and eventual disbarment for moving forward.

I want to see your “phony assignments”, especially if they involve a securitized trust, MERS, known robosigners, self-dealing, claims of merger known to be false, etc.

Send them to be at cloudedtitles@gmail.com.  I personally want to see what you’re facing.  If you have even more sense, you’ll include your contact information with your pdf submission. I’m compiling a list of aggrieved homeowners in each state, be it mortgage or deed of trust, and their violative assignments.  I DO NOT NEED TO SEE YOUR ENTIRE CASE FILES! Anyone sending me anything but what I asked for will see their emails deleted!

In the meantime, keep calm and carry on.  And remember, pro se litigants need not apply. Misapplication of any of what was discussed in any of the ten parts of this series of posts is done at your peril.

To everyone else reading these successively “belly gutting” posts: May the odds be ever in your favor.

 

7 Comments

Filed under OP-ED