Tag Archives: Osceola County Forensic Examination

Foreclosure and your civil rights: A judge rules against you in spite of questionable land record documents … what to do next? (PART I)

(OP-ED) — This overview of cases involving civil rights abuses are the author’s opinions based on his legal research and are for educational purposes only and should not constitute any rendering of legal advice or seek to draw any conclusions of law. The first five points are discussed below:

The time at which a § 1983 claim accrues “is a question of federal law,” “conforming in general to common-law tort principles,” and is presumptively–but not always–“when the plaintiff has ‘a complete and present cause of action.'” Wallace v. Kato, 549 U.S. 384, 388 (2007); Manuel v. Joliet, U.S. Sup. Ct. No. 14-9496 (2017).

— As cited in McDonough v. Smith, U.S. Sup. Ct. No. 18-485 (2019)

This post is circumspect as to the discussion of the items postulated within the land record audit and forensics investigation conducted by the author and his team of researchers in Williamson County, Texas (2012-2013) and Osceola County, Florida (2013-2014), respectively. Anyone who has read through these 179-page and 758-page reports will realize that they are just that … the means to call out an injustice that should have come to light, but never did, during the period following the 2008 financial collapse. Over 10-million homes were taken through both judicial and non-judicial means … and this case, coupled with several others discussed in this post, culminate into what the author has determined is a potentially valid 42 USC § 1983 civil rights claim, which must be filed in federal court in a timely manner.

FALSE AND MISREPRESENTATIVE STATEMENTS

As both of the foregoing reports concluded, documents numbering into the tens of thousands poured into the land records of all 3,041 counties and boroughs across America, each containing false and misrepresentative statements that predicated the actions taken by the banks’ servicers. These documents were generally created under the orders of the servicers themselves and were generally executed by the servicers’ employees, posing as Assistant Secretaries, Vice Presidents or other “loan documentation” employees of the servicer, posing as representatives of the alleged Lenders “in an official capacity”, when in fact, many of these signers were $10/hour paid flunkies who sat around in cubicles and signing rooms, affixing their signatures and notarial seals by the hundreds … per hour, without reading or knowing of the contents contained within the documents as to their validity!

Better than 99% of these documents continue to litter these same land records to this very day and only about .001% of Americans are the wiser.

POINT #1: When the alleged civil rights infraction has occurred

In the McDonough v. Smith case, which was based on a New York State criminal action, the action came to rest in the hands of the United States Supreme Court, which decided on June 20, 2019, in a very narrow opinion, that the action taken by elected official McDonough against prosecutor Smith was untimely. The allegations were based on the alleged manufacture of evidence against McDonough by Smith, not once, but twice. Due to this prosecution (by Smith), McDonough was deprived of his liberty (put in jail) due to this allegedly manufactured evidence. From the foregoing statement that is highlighted in bold-faced type, you can clearly ascertain WHEN you get to file a civil rights-based lawsuit … AFTER your foreclosure has been completed against you and you’ve lost your property at sale.

POINT #2: It is assumed that you are taking notice of the offenders

In order to make this case in point, the author is relying on the assumption that anyone reading the audit and forensic examination will come to realize that not all is copacetic in assignment-land. It is the assignment of the mortgage or deed of trust that is posited here as “manufactured evidence”, to be relied upon for a “conviction”, even though the intended venue is the civil realm and not the criminal. However, the alleged criminal activity involving the manufacture of the documents, which generally appear years after the alleged transfer of notes into REMIC trusts or some other junk debt pool, which says it’s a trust but in reality is nothing more than a third-party debt buyer deceiving both the land recorders and the civil judges alike, is at stake here due to the reliance of its validity.

It is further assumed that every party involved with or “touching” that assignment from its inception to its recorded form and relying upon it thereafter in the taking of your home, knowing the statements contained within said assignment were false and misrepresentative, is McDonough in the civil realm. The documents predated a civil prosecution (foreclosure) and were manufactured as part of a suspected criminal act.

To make it more plain and simple, YOU, the homeowner, did not deceive the land record, the servicers’ employees did. Maybe the law firm acting on behalf of the servicer did by furthering the lie. Maybe the judge knew or should have known that the documents in the case in chief contained questionable statements; however, chose to ignore them for the sake of convenience in clearing off a packed court docket without giving the homeowner (or his attorney) a chance to prove that the prosecution’s case was based on false evidence.

POINT #3: The aspects of perjury and the subornation thereof

18 USC § 1621 (in pertinent part): “Whoever–having taken an oath before a competent tribunal, officer or person, in any case in which a law of the United States authorizes an oath to be administered, that he will testify, declare, depose, or certify truly, or that any written testimony, declaration, deposition, or certificate by him subscribed, is true, willfully and contract to such oath states or subscribes any material matter which he does not believe to be true … is guilty of perjury and shall … be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.”

18 USC § 1622 (in pertinent part): “a person convicted of subornation of perjury may be fined $2,000 and sentenced to up to five years in prison.”

Under the latter, there are five elements which must be proven: (1) that the defendant make an agreement with the person to testify falsely; (2) that the perjury was in fact committed by the offender; (3) the false statements of the perjurer were material to the outcome of the case; (4) that the statements were made knowing of their falsity; and (5) there must be proof that the procurer had knowledge that the perjurer’s statements were false.

This is one of the key issues presenting itself as to the “further than arm’s length transactions” involved in foreclosure so as to create plausible deniability on the part of the perpetrators. Much of this can be ferreted out in depositions, which California attorney Al West has seen first hand.

POINT #4: The recorded alleged false statements in the land record

From the fact patterns discussed in the two foregoing reports, which are shown here for your review (if you so choose) …

… it became obvious to the author (in compiling the data shown in each of the reports) that a fact pattern involving timely suspect behavior occurred at about the time of the prosecution of the foreclosure, despite the fact the alleged information contained within the assignments that showed up in the land records just prior to (or in some cases AFTER the foreclosure action was started) the foreclosure case had indeed occurred.

It should also be noted here that these reports were not indictments, but merely “call outs” to alleged misbehavior on the part of third-party document mills or deceitful acts authorized or carried out by the mortgage loan servicers themselves. In March of 2012, the servicers collectively told the states and the federal government they wouldn’t create suspect documents and record them in the land records anymore, but as history shows (as demonstrated by the audit and forensic examination), no sooner was the ink dry on that agreement, it was back to business as usual.

Thus, the chains of title have been presumedly corrupted by this behavior, which of late, has gotten more sinister in nature, covered up by recorded powers of attorney that appear to grant some sort of authority to misbehave in the drafting of such documents, with no one the wiser.

POINT #5: The statements made within the foreclosure process itself

The next set of documents that appear suspect in the prosecution of the actual foreclosure itself are shown to be that of the “affidavits” or “declarations” made by the servicer’s employee, attached in similar form to both judicial and non-judicial actions. The difference here is that the non-judicial action contains a recorded statement known similarly as “Notice of Default and Election to Sell” and “Notice of Trustee’s Sale”. In both instances, these recorded notices contain the alleged suspect statements, predicated by the suspect assignment, then followed by the alleged “Appointment of Substitute Trustee”, which is not “neutral” by any means.

The judicial aspect involves the filing of a foreclosure complaint and the sworn declaration that accompanies the complaint filing, assumedly from the lender’s representative, when in fact, it’s the servicer’s employee making the statements. These statements then find their way into the initial court case filing.

The second “whammy” is when the servicer’s employee, who has been assumedly “coached” as to how to testify, many times in mock trials at the servicer’s headquarters so that their testimony is groomed to become so believable that the homeowner’s attorney swears the employee is telling the truth, that this is where the suspect “open court subornation of perjury” indeed occurs because: (1) the person testifying has been educated by the servicer to become a professional liar; and (2) the person testifying is relying on the suspect manufactured documents created by others and recorded in the land records of the county the subject property is located in.

HOMEOWNERS CAUGHT UNAWARES

As history has shown us, when the foreclosure debacle first started to litter the courts with cases, 97% of the noticed homeowners “cut and ran” without even entertaining the options. Their “Come to Jesus” meetings were based on fear of a bad result, predicated by a string of unfortunate events, which forced them to simply pack up and flee. The banks and their servicers were counting on this … and they succeeded admirably.

The other 3% of homeowners attempted to retain unlearned attorneys, who were naive as to the trickery committed not only in the land records, but through the MERS® System of things and the illicit behavior of the foreclosure mills … and bad case law affecting homeowners. It took awhile for these defense attorneys to come to grips with what was actually going on … and by then, even the judges were led to believe that what they were doing was above board, when in fact, it was based on manufactured evidence that should have been brought to light beforehand.

And this is why the author and California Attorney Al West created:

The C & E on Steroids!

… because these declaratory relief actions should predicate the foreclosure action, not only creating delays, but to serve as a warning to those who would involve themselves in the chain of deceit involving the taking of a person’s property.

Sadly, 99.9% of all homeowners fail to understand this strategy, which could force a court to quiet title to any given piece of affected property and potentially cause a criminal action to be pursued against those committing perjury and suborning perjury in their sworn statements of record.

What most foreclosure victims also don’t understand is that the application of a civil rights action is also predicated on the denial of declaratory relief, which is the basis for the Cancellation & Expungement (C & E) Action.

Everything that the author has discussed in PART I is the “set-up” to what liability could be ascertained throughout the foreclosure case itself, which a person with some skill and knowledge could do the research on to identify the most likely culpable targets therein.

IN PART II the author will discuss the pertinent parts of various cases in which the courts have identified these misrepresentations and what part of “all is not lost” applies to you, even if you lose on appeal. Yes, there are administrative remedies which have to be exhausted if one is going to go after an attorney, a judge and/or the county that pays them … and how the counties insure themselves against liability … out of a self-insured risk pool.

IN PART III … the author will discuss the attack strategy in the realm of 42 USC § 1983 and 42 USC § 1985, focusing not just on the perpetrators of the phony documents, but also at the attorneys involved in the prosecution of the foreclosures and the judges and the counties that employ them when the judges make bad decisions (like Al West says the judges say to him when approached about the documents, “What else ya got?”), which could make them accomplices to perjury and the subornation thereof.

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED, Securitization Issues

REAL ESTATE AGENCIES, TITLE COMPANIES GEAR UP FOR MASS FORECLOSURES … UPDATE!

(BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED) — The information being offered in this post is current as of October 21, 2020 as of 12 noon Eastern Daylight Time and should be considered as to reasons why the foreclosure crisis is imminent. Any opinions offered are the author’s and do not constitute the rendering of legal advice. This post is for educational purposes only.

UPDATE: The webinar was held by a spokesperson for the Fidelity National Title Group (FLORIDA) at 11:00 a.m. EDT. Here’s what came of it all:

(1) FNTG’s “Agent Advantage” presentation was appealing to agents to become REO “handlers” of properties that are likely to face foreclosure, especially after the 1st of January. Homeowners that are in default with government-backed loans are going to get 120 days notice prior to the acceleration of the note. Those who don’t cure their loans will find themselves in the middle of a foreclosure proceeding, whether in a judicial or non-judicial format.

(2) Despite the fact the webinar was geared more toward Florida foreclosures, there were several key items of importance … especially where the title company downplayed what might happen if an REO-type Realtor® were told by the bank to go inspect the property, either by drive-by and/or personal knock-knock … the spokesperson used the language, “they might let their pit bull loose” or something worse, without saying that the Realtor® might get their ass blown away by a pissed off homeowner with a shotgun that doesn’t feel like leaving because they’re scared they’ll get COVID-19.

(3) All of the asset management companies that went away because the last foreclosure crisis dried up are now going to start popping up again and the spokesperson gave several locations of where to find these scalawags when they manifest themselves.

(4) If you’re a tenant, the U.S. Government says you have to be given a 90-day notice to quit. In the alternative, the bank might let you ride out your lease as long as you pay the bank your rent money. Heck, you might even make the bank an offer and finance the property out of the foreclosure!

Part of the issue here is that due to the pending foreclosure crisis … and I believe (in the first person here) that you are being given sufficient warning to understand that there will be a crisis … it’s just a matter of WHEN … how can you liquidate properties that are actually insurable when the titles to most of these properties are clouded? (I could have used another more definitive expletive to describe title conditions but I won’t … you get the picture.)

I believe the investor community will come out in full force looking for bargain basement opportunities to score on what may turn out to be another rash of shadow inventory flooding the market. In order to meet these demands, real estate agents must know how to deal in Real Estate Owned (REO) properties and how to process them, whether it be through short sales or actual seizure by parties that might not be entitled to take them. To that end, real estate companies that handle REO properties are going to be looking to hire (retain) additional agents to handle this mess.

Further, title companies have to issue policies covering the defects in title if these REO’s are going to be liquidated. The problem is … they can’t … not without a Schedule B exception. This means if an investor acquires the property that has been taken “hook or by crook”, chances are he’s going to get a quit claim or special warranty deed that exempts the alleged “grantor” from all liability connected with the purchase of the home, which in essence means that the only thing the home can be used for is rental income, at least until enough time passes when a title company will insure that property. Whatever the case, it’s going to be a free for all in the REO market.

You can bet the banks won’t be the ones doing the foreclosing either. It will be their mortgage loan servicers, who have been paying all of these delinquent bills on behalf of the borrower to the investors of the REMICs and junk debt pools (like LSF9). These shysters will go to great lengths to make their stories plausible, the likes of which make for a great criminal complaint to the county sheriff.

CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS … FALLING ON DEAF EARS?

In my book, if your State has a criminal code or statute that says it’s illegal to record documents in the land records that contain patently false and misrepresentative information, then a criminal prosecution should result. The problem is, 99.9% of homeowners do not understand what their rights are when it comes to challenging criminal issues. Nope, it’s not a citizen’s arrest. It’s a citizens formal declaration to law enforcement that a crime has occurred and a demand to law enforcement to do something about it.

To my knowledge, dozens of complaints have been lodged with county sheriffs all over the U.S. and nothing is being done. Virtually none of these complaints is being investigated. The excuses?

“We don’t have the manpower to investigate white collar crime.”

“This looks to be more of a civil matter rather than a criminal one.”

“I don’t see any injured party here.”

I’ve heard these excuses directly from the mouths of sheriff’s investigators and district attorneys I’ve met with. Two detectives from Osceola County, Florida actually had the chutzpah to tell me that the items I stated in the Osceola County Forensic Examination were “victimless crimes”.

And California attorney Al West was sitting right there beside me and heard it all, in total shock and disbelief. His comment was, “You guys are way in over your head. This is way above your pay grade.”

This is why you have the power to attack the bonds of the sheriff and the district attorney if they refuse to investigate and prosecute your complaint. The bonding information can be acquired through the County Attorney, County Executive or the county’s Risk Manager. You simply complain to the bonding company that the county violated your due process rights regarding redress of grievances under the Constitution and get your 42 USC § 1983 paperwork in order. Start with obtaining the bonding agent’s name and complete contact information. It may take you all the way into the State’s very own risk pool (a big pool of money used to pay off indiscretions carried out by public officers against the injured) in the form of a Tort Claims Action.

Again, I recall a recent post where I posited two cases, one written by Hon. Amy Coney Barrett, where due process rights come into play if “the other side” uses dishonorable means to prosecute a case:

The other case was a ruling from the U. S. Supreme Court:

What’s just as bad is when a judge goes along with all of this bogus paperwork and thinks that he/she doesn’t have to answer for any defective paperwork, even after being put on notice by the court that he/she could be an accessory to fraud on the court and/or perjury and/or subornation of perjury by the foreclosure mill attorney of any witness put on the stand if he ignores your warning.

This is one of the key items we’ll be discussing in the upcoming Foreclosure Defense 101 Workshop this Saturday (October 24, 2020) from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. EDT, which is being offered as a online webinar. Can’t attend? That’s okay. We’re going to make the entire webinar recording available afterwards, so don’t panic … yet. Remember, there is a foreclosure crisis looming and we don’t want you to be a victim … at least not without a fight.

If you don’t know your rights … you don’t have any.

Leave a comment

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED, webinar, workshop

Judge Amy Coney Barrett Should be Nominated to the U.S. Supreme Court … Op-Ed!

(OP-ED) — As the tide of foreclosures starts to swell across America, I felt it my solemn, patriotic duty to inject some interesting perspective as the Senate takes up hearings to confirm President Trump’s nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Articles depicting the kind of judge Amy Coney Barrett would be goes against the grain of the Democrats’ choice. I’ve read numerous opinions and diatribes about her rulings and one jumped off the page at me. I had to research it and bring it to the forefront because it involves lying in an affidavit. Those of you facing foreclosure are going to want to listen up!

Those of you who have been taken to task in foreclosure may understand exactly where I’m going with this. This involves more than just Black Lives Matter because more than just the black folk have been foreclosed on.

You want civil rights? Then you need to read these two cases. They came out in separate venues nearly six months apart. One case was written by Judge Amy Coney Barrett of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in January of 2019 and the other was opined by the U.S. Supreme Court in June of 2019.

Both opinions have to do with manufacturing false evidence to get a conviction. When I brought this up on my radio show (kdwradio.com), my co-host looked at the Supreme Court case and said, “This is a game changer” … and concluded that the scenario in that case could be applied to foreclosures! Neither of us had seen the Rainsberger case at that time.

Judge Barrett wrote the opinion in the 7th Circuit case. It finds for Rainsberger, who claimed he was deprived of his civil rights based on the phony information either stated or omitted from Detective Benner’s affidavit, which was submitted to the prosecutors to get a conviction.

Ironically, in BOTH cases, a second “bite at the apple” was attempted in an attempt to fabricate evidence to try for a second indictment. Barrett, in writing for the Court, stated that Detective Benner lost his qualified immunity when he lied on the affidavit. Sounds like the Supreme Court, who didn’t even cite the Benner case in their ruling in McDonough, got it right. 42 USC 1983 is a powerful tool. 42 USC 1985 is even more powerful.

Let’s apply these cases to foreclosures and why I’m so keen on filing criminal complaints, whether they’re taken and prosecuted or not.

Mortgage loan servicers hire cheaply-paid employees who are instructed to create, sign and execute assignments, lost note or lost assignment affidavits and corrective assignments. Most of the time where I have seen these come into the recorded realm, I have found numerous instances where the statements made within these documents were false and misrepresentative. The statements contained within these documents are then relied upon to get a “conviction” in foreclosure courts, because like criminal cases, foreclosure cases are “prosecuted” in much the same way, it’s just they’re prosecuted in the civil realm, but the objective appears the same … lie your way through the proceeding by relying on false testimony from others and steal the house by any means possible.

The sad thing about all of this … the mortgage loan servicers who represent the alleged “lenders” in court are getting away with it because judges are allowing the false testimony into evidence. The majority of the time, the aggrieved homeowners do NOT know how to proceed against these documents and false statements, despite the numerous amount of workshops I’ve done and books I’ve authored. Because of COVID, the sensitivity of these issues is heightened because of the perceived exposure to a virus that could be fatal once one is kicked out of their home and forced to live within society, where the potential to contract the “disease”, which is really not a disease but a catalyst to exacerbate pre-existing medical conditions, could afflict them. It’s one thing to be kicked out of your home. It’s quite another to die because you were infected because you were kicked out of your home.

This is why I am conducting an online Foreclosure Defense 101 Workshop. People will not have to leave their homes and fly somewhere and stay in a hotel and inherently put themselves at risk. They can take this 4-hour class in front of their computer and ask questions of the lecturers about the research they are sharing. It’s an inexpensive way to increase your learning curve!

CLICK HERE FOR MORE INFORMATION

I have asked one retired attorney (R. J. Malloy), who for nine years clerked for a U. S. District Court Judge (the late John Underwood) and Al West (my co-author of two different works, The Quiet Title War Manual and The C & E on Steroids!) to join me in giving you the necessary tools to stay in your home while you get your “end game” together. Also joining us in studio will be Ron Gillis, a Florida homeowner who has fought off the bank’s attorneys for over 12 years, just by knowing the “in’s and out’s” of the courts. Gillis may have taken a few hits in defending his home, but he’s also dished out plenty at the bank’s lawyers!

Bottom line: If you don’t know your rights … you don’t have any.

Judge Amy Coney Barrett at least recognizes what the consequences should be if you lie or misrepresent the truth in depriving someone of their life, liberty or property. This is one of the reasons you should be calling your Senators and “yelling” at them to nominate her. Having her on the Court may not sit well with every decision she’s made as a judge. But when it comes to deciding whether those who are truly at fault should be granted a free pass if they lie to further the prosecution of their cases, then We the People need to put someone in the driver’s seat that will take action against the current pandemic of false documents (recorded in our land records) and protect our civil rights in the process.

The one thing foreclosed homeowners didn’t realize … but I bet they do now … is that the criminal complaint against those drafting the paper … if enough people start doing it … can make a difference in the way law enforcement treats our concerns. If those responsible for recording false documents were sent to jail (like Lorraine M. Brown of DOCX fame was), this behavior would stop. However, most law enforcement agencies treat these matters as if they’re civil cases and thus, find easy excuses to bail on the homeowners (i.e. “take it up with the judge”) and not even bother to investigate these cases. To me, this appears to be a travesty of justice right from the start. When the Sheriff doesn’t act, the crime committed in the county land records is allowed to stand. We must demand more from our law enforcement when it comes to perjury and subornation of perjury (from attorneys involved in either creating or assisting in the creation of in these false and misrepresentative documents and from the parties executing these documents and causing them to be publicly recorded).

It’s not your fault the banks and their servicers omitted paperwork and messed everything up when they went to securitize your mortgage loan.

Unfortunately, the documents that were created as depicted in the foregoing video are still being forged and falsified to this very day, even though in March of 2012, the mortgage loan servicers collectively stated they would no longer allow business to be conducted that way. That too, was also a lie. As was exemplified in the documents found in the land records in the Osceola County Forensic Examination by my team and I, there was and still is an ongoing pattern of illicit behavior, which at the time, the County Sheriff, the State’s Attorney, the Department of Justice and the FBI, refused to investigate.

A lie is a lie. A false statement is a false statement. The two cases in this post are no different in their conclusions that one cannot prosecute a case based on false evidence. That’s my take. What’s yours?

1 Comment

Filed under OP-ED

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

WHEN THE NOT-SO-OBVIOUS BECOMES OBVIOUS …

(OP-ED) — The author of this post is not an attorney.  I hate having to put disclaimers on here, but some people can’t separate common sense from what might be termed “legal advice”; thus, given the behavior of  “the system of things” to always backfire at some point in time, caveats are always necessary in any walk of life.

Happy New Year!

Being as it’s 2019 still doesn’t change the fact that on many an occasion, mortgage loan servicers are the parties actually conducting the foreclosures both judicial and non-judicial settings.  We’re seeing an uptick in the number of cases where assignments of mortgage or deed of trust show the “assignee” as the benefactor of the mortgage loan (ONLY) which is when the conveniently-manufactured “excuse” for paperwork is discovered in the land records around the time of the foreclosure action.  This does not excuse the fact that you have no contract with the servicer, but the lender does … maybe.  Some sort of authority has to represent what the servicer can do and cannot do; however … no one bothers to check limited powers of attorney to see if such authority was ever granted.  Are we by-passing that evaluation all because of desperation, which causes us to overlook detail?

The Not-So-Obvious … 

Roughly about a year ago, a sailboat waterfront property in Punta Gorda, Florida was sold at auction.  The winning bidder paid the fees and went to closing, only to find out Select Portfolio Servicing, LP, the mortgage loan servicer behind the auction, wasn’t the proper party to be selling the foreclosed home.  The deal fell through.  Who discovered it?   The title company that was trying to close the deal!

The Obvious …

It looked like all the paperwork was there, except when it wasn’t.  And look who discovered it … the title company.  They weren’t going to insure the home because the seller didn’t have the authority to sell it, nor did the seller (SPS) have an interest in it.  How can a party with no interest in foreclosed property sell it?   Which brings me to another point.  Since this foreclosure auction was in Florida, which is a judicial state … in order to get to the point where it went to auction, a final judgment of foreclosure had to be obtained from the circuit court, which it was. This means that someone had to lie to the judge to get the final judgment in the first place!  Did the attorney(s) who made the misrepresentations in court, both in the pleadings and in oral arguments, get sanctioned or punished?  Hell, no!  Why?  Because the Borrowers (who were from Michigan; Florida has a lot of “snowbirds” that own property there that don’t bother to check condition of title when they purchase Florida property) didn’t bring it up … and …

The Not-So-Obvious …

Because Florida judges only care about the bonuses they get from the State Legislature for kicking people to the curb any way they can!  Generally, that’s done through some overlooked procedural process … or in cases where the Borrowers show up in court, the judge then ambushes the Borrowers (and their attorneys) by asking, “When’s the last time you made a mortgage payment?”  or in the alternative … “Are you in default?”  (as if you know the legal meaning of default).  You blindly answer because of intimidation.

The Obvious …

Instead of objecting to the judge’s question by fundamentally answering that the servicer may have been making the payments for you all along, there is no firm proof of when the last payment was made on the account; and there’s no real proof that anyone is in default, except maybe the servicer, for failing to make the payments as part of their contractual obligation to the lender.  No one ever goes there, especially when there’s a REMIC trust involved.  What the judge is doing is trying to justify the foreclosure by side-stepping your due process rights to discovery.  When you let him/her do that, they get a bonus … AND … you get kicked to the curb!

The Not-So-Obvious … 

The banks already know and assume, because it’s a numbers game, that homeowners don’t have the money to fight and that 95% of them will run if given the opportunity, instead of fighting for what’s theirs.  The banks may be aware that the servicer is the real party retaining the foreclosing attorney or law firm, but they simply look at the complaint caption and take what’s written in the pleadings as the gospel truth, when it is far from it.  This is why it’s disadvantageous to live in a deed of trust (non-judicial) state than in a judicial (mortgage) state, where you get your day in court … because all foreclosures are deemed to be legal until otherwise challenged.

The obvious … 

If and when you find yourself with more month at the end of the money and the mortgage payment is going to be late or short in dollar amount, it is certain your account will be red-flagged after the 10th of the following month when the mortgage payment isn’t received.  As per the patterns discovered in the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION, it is also highly likely that the mortgage loan servicer will direct its employees to manufacture a phony assignment, using MERS to cover up the chain of title, to convey your property (along with the note, which MERS cannot do since it admittedly doesn’t have an interest in the note) into a REMIC trust.  This will happen within the 90-day period of you not making timely mortgage payments.  This is all done because the servicer wants your home because it’s going to get reimbursed for all of those payments (principal and interest) it made for you!

The Not-So-Obvious … 

What the servicer doesn’t tell you is that when it starts sending you loan modification paperwork, the foreclosure paperwork shuffle affecting your home is already in progress.  It is at this point in time that borrowers are distracted by distress and frustration, all by design planning on the part of the servicer.  This is why there are so many complaints against mortgage loan servicers these days.

The Obvious … 

You have a limited amount of time to prepare … either to run or to fight the good fight.  Your research should include talking to at least two different foreclosure defense attorneys.  Within 90 days to six months, you can expect to get a notice that the proceedings just got traction and are moving forward.  I can guarantee you 100% that if you do nothing, you lose your home.

The Not-So-Obvious … 

Mortgage loan servicers really hate discovery.  They have limited information in the Borrowers’ Collateral Loan Files.  Most Borrowers take the path of least resistance, which is what the servicers are counting on, and send them a Qualified Written Request under RESPA § 6, expecting to get a document dump of everything in their file, which is NOT what the servicer wants to see or hear.  Borrowers seem to forget that a QWR is not real discovery.  Servicers side-step all sorts of issues in answering QWR’s outside of a court case.

The Obvious … 

The chain of title has evidence which you can readily obtain in certified form, especially the assignments!  The devil is in the details and that is exactly where you’ll find your false and misrepresentative statements!   The Borrower should seek out counsel that is versed in discovery in order to craft questions and statements that are likely to have to set the stage for a Motion to Compel to get the servicer to answer them.  No discovery = No truth!

And the truth shall set you free!

 

3 Comments

Filed under OP-ED