Tag Archives: Osceola County Forensic Examination

FLORIDA FORECLOSURE COURTS APPEAR “STACKED” IN FAVOR OF JUDGES! EVEN MORE BREAKING NEWS!

EVEN MORE BREAKING NEWS — (from previous post on April 25, 2018)

Just to let you know that the author of this post and his WKDW-FM 97.5 Radio Co-host R. J. Malloy are NOT taking the Florida Supreme Court hearing involving Florida Bar charges of professional misconduct against Florida attorney Mark Stopa lying down, a team of attorneys and this author drafted an Open Records Act request to the Clerk of the Supreme Court, demanding a copy of the Florida judge’s remarks as part of the transcript, to further analyze it to find out whether or not to bring in a team of attorneys to sue the State of Florida Legislature, each state legislator personally and in their individual capacity, the Florida Attorney General (for not doing something to prevent potential conflicting legislation from being enforced) and the Florida Bar and the Judicial Qualifications Commission of the State of Florida who had to have known the implications of the legislation that rewarded judges’ behavior in foreclosure courts across the state with bonuses based on performance in clearing foreclosure dockets.  Read the request here:

stoparequestpdf-053118

We will be following up on this in short order and are still looking into the “rewards program” for judges.  It disturbs us (the team of attorneys I am in communication with) that collectively, as both lawyers and non-lawyers, that the legislature could stoop so low as to “reward bad behavior” in the denial of due process rights by passing legislation incentivizing foreclosure court judges to quickly clear off their dockets in order to get these bonuses.

We are just getting word that the Supreme Court of Florida plans on suspending Stopa’s license to practice law for one year.  Generally, attorneys have thirty (30) days to clear off their case loads and close their practices after getting formal notice.  We are awaiting further news on the latest developments.

(Updated on May 31, 2018 to reflect new development in this matter.)

BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED —

The sinking feeling that overcomes Florida homeowners entering the foreclosure arena (the Sunshine State’s version of a 3-ring circus aka “rocket docket”) was finally manifested in the case against Florida attorney Mark Stopa, who has been at the center of controversy for being abrasive before these judges, resulting in possible disbarment for professional misconduct.

In my book, when you win foreclosure cases (which means the banks lose), judges don’t like it … by that I mean having the obvious thrown in their faces; however … and we are trying to get the transcript from Stopa’s recent Florida Supreme Court hearing … it does appear that the deck has been inadvertently “stacked” against Florida homeowners in favor of not only the banks, but the judges hearing the cases as well!  Think I’m exaggerating here?  Take a look at what Stopa posted on this Facebook page:

Even with the glare of the screenshot covering up the word “notable”, what is hard to fathom is how Florida foreclosure court judges are seemingly on the “take” when it comes to clearing off their court dockets and how they were incentivized by the Florida legislature.  So, does this mean that Pam Blondie is going to investigate this scheme?  Not likely.  She wouldn’t investigate the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION, which Stopa’s buddy Matt Weidener snubbed on Orlando television.  These two aren’t “holier than thou” in my book; however, I am willing to concede that the testimony from this hearing is probably damning in more ways than one and could have only happened at Stopa’s expense.  What makes these allegations (in the form of testimony from a judge included) make things any different?   Felonies are felonies and judges handling foreclosure cases appear to have gone right along with the scheme of things.  Among the rumors … that judges financially profited from the scheme based on their “performance”!

If the transcript (which trust me … is going to be gone over with a fine-toothed comb) bears any other significant testimony, you can bet we’ll use it against the judges in Florida’s foreclosure courts relative to Florida Criminal Code § 817.535 cases.  The Florida States’ Attorneys have every opportunity to launch their own independent investigations but none, including the recently-elected Aramis Ayala (in Florida’s 9th Circuit) have lifted a damned finger to investigate and prosecute any of this suspect behavior.

Exactly how many legislators and judges have been paid off by the banks to facilitate this fraud?   The stuff contained within the Stopa Facebook post seems to parallel the Volusia County judicial rag that told judges there that their “performance” was being monitored and if they knew what was good for them, they’d tow the line and clear their foreclosure dockets!   If one of their own has come clean and testified to the Florida Supremes that this sort of crap behavior is going on, then I say, it’s time to unseat every damned Florida foreclosure judge and every legislator that fell victim to this corruption (the next best thing to tar and feathers or the stocks) and hang their sorry ass political careers out to dry.

When you incentivize a Florida foreclosure judge, what do you think he’ll/she’ll do?   Of course they want to go out with a financial bang!

How many of these judges are pedophiles?   Has anyone ever investigated how much pornography is on these judges’ computers?

It seems we can’t shake these rumors.   All one has to do is examine the number of prosecutions were conducted by the Florida Judicial Qualifications Commission (JQC) and a lot of the so-called “disciplinary” actions seem lame when you compare what came out in Stopa’s hearing about the incentivizing of a foreclosure judge?   Has anyone investigated the Florida judges for acquiring property through the very own foreclosure hearing they ruled upon?  We’d like to hear about it.  If you have pictures or recorded documents of Florida judges acquiring foreclosed homes … this represents a clear conflict of interest and a bigger part of the conspiracy to defraud Florida homeowners.  Hell, it represents serious criminal activity, obviously spearheaded by some serious bank lobbying in Tallahassee.

MORE BREAKING NEWS! —

We received word from the Florida Supreme Court on the request we posited under the Florida Open Records Act and got nowhere because, even with clarity, the Clerk did not “get” what we were asking for, so we’re doing more research into the Stopa hearing, which apparently was in St. Petersburg, Florida (Pinellas County) in an open hearing held on April 21, 2018. From Stopa’s Facebook page, we know a woman judge spoke on his behalf and revealed damning information about judges being paid bonuses!  Stopa’s office is not saying much of anything, but we are hearing back channel information that Stopa may not get any suspension time at all, following our Open Records Act request!  We have also heard that other complaints against him are still pending and haven’t made the disciplinary committee yet. This is even more disconcerting because it demonstrates that the more you aggressively fight for homeowners, the more the “system” tries to beat you down.  Foreclosures are big business and the banks don’t like losing, so they will resort to any means to take out their opponent, so we’re going to start doing the same back at them!

If you didn’t get what I just said … we will be explaining HOW in the upcoming workshop!   And the banks aren’t going to like it! 

Stay tuned!

We’re going to figure out a bigger mousetrap given this testimony and we expect to have that scenario to present to you in the upcoming FORECLOSURE DEFENSE WORKSHOP … because now … given this diatribe (seen in the screenshot above) … the judge has now become an additional target.  This also means that given the testimony, it is possible that thousands of foreclosure cases could be vacated and reopened in order to vet judicial involvement.  I don’t think you realize the implications this testimony has brought out … yet.

The registration to attend this workshop is still OPEN!  Visit the Clouded Titles website and sign up now to learn strategies on targeting not only the banks’ attorneys but the judges as well!  This workshop is for educational purposes only and is not representative of the corruption that appears to be ongoing in Florida’s foreclosure courts!  After this revelation, it’s no holds barred!  We told you … when it comes to foreclosure … this means war!

The information presented here is viable for all 50 states!

 

15 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

SIX YEARS LATER … AND THEY’RE STILL ROBOSIGNING!

OP-ED — 

In March of 2012, all of the major servicers and the 49 States Attorneys General (except Oklahoma) inked an agreement wherein the servicers would stop the then-common practice of “robosigning” documents.  Six years later and it’s still going on.  I thought it best to clarify a few things before discussing where we are today.

Robosigning was a term referenced often by the late Kings County, New York Judge Arthur Schack, wherein he described the act of affixing signatures to documents in such a manner that: (a.) the signatures were illegible; (b.) the signatures could have been affixed by anyone [also known as surrogate signing]; (c.) contained information that was grossly distorted or misrepresentative [in HSBC v Taher_Schack, he noted that the address of the REMIC was at the same address as that of Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC in Palm Beach County, Florida], and now Ocwen Financial is acquiring PHH Mortgage, which was notorious for carrying on the same process that prompted the AG settlement.

Typical aspects (I call them “markers”) of robosigning include: (a.) scribbled signatures; (b.) varied signatures of the same name; and (c.) signatures different from the indicated name typed underneath the signature line.

Surrogate Signing came to light in the wake of the discovery of Linda Green, whose name was so easy to sign that everyone at DOCX was doing it: THE NEXT HOUSING SHOCK

As you may know, the President of DOCX ended up in Club Fed.  This conviction (of Lorraine M. Brown) was the only significant “slap on the hand” for bad behavior (of a document mill officer) that resulted in the loss of millions of homes in foreclosure actions through fraudulently-manufactured-then-publicly-recorded documents.

Typical markers of surrogate signing can be found on documents generated prior to 2012, that are commonly (and still) relied upon to tie together a chain of title for the purposes of “stealing” a borrower’s home.  Just because the borrower signed a note and mortgage doesn’t give the banking cartel the right to be sloppy about the way they followed their own procedures involving securitization (or the lack thereof).

Notary Fraud can occur in a multitude of ways.  Each state has specific regulations governing the commission of notaries public.  One doing any kind of research however, will need to pay attention to the regulations of certain states, which have (for all intents and purposes) watered down the obligations and governing regulations of notaries.  Some states do not require a notary bond.  Some states do not require notaries keep a journal of every notarial acknowledgment they perform.  Some states don’t even require that the notary physically witness the signature of the person executing the document.  What those in state government do not understand is that they are complicit in the very behaviors they put Lorraine Brown in prison for because local prosecutors do nothing to stop any of the foregoing behaviors for fear of putting their own political asses in a sling.

Some states (like California) require the notary to sign under penalty of perjury.  Perjury is a criminal matter, which can result in jail time.  Local prosecutors could easily make short work of handling a notary fraud case, simply by investigating the notary … it only takes one conviction to send a message … but they don’t.

As a “marker”, notary fraud could be the result of: (a.) acknowledging a signature that wasn’t affixed by the party claiming to have executed the document; (b.) acknowledging an execution when the party affixing their signature wasn’t present at signing; (c.) acknowledging an execution of a document as a party to a group of signers who routinely manufacture assignments of mortgage or deed of trust (similar to what went on in Simi Valley, California between 2012 and 2016 at Bank of America, N.A.’s robomill); (d.) participating as a notary in any document manufacturing scheme wherein the information placed within the document is false and misrepresentative and was placed there intentionally (civil conspiracy) wherein the notary was directed to participate as part of the signing process with the knowledge that what the notary was doing was illegitimate; and (e.) pre-acknowledging documents and affixing a seal with no signatures placed upon the document.

Self-Assignment is a common marker of the major banking institutions who can’t find paperwork, so they have their own employees (whether the major bank is servicing the loan or not) make stuff up out of thin air.  An example of this follows (with my analysis).  This is also included in the scheme of document manufacturing.

All of the foregoing “markers” are part of a scheme called “Document Manufacturing”

I talk about this extensively in the book Clouded Titles, which has undergone several updates between its original publication in December 2010 and its final “Mayday Edition” on May 1, 2016 because of newly-discovered information pertinent to investigations by this author through Chain of Title Assessments (COTAs) this author has conducted.

Document Manufacturing is the process by which multiple parties are retained by a mortgage loan servicer to act in a capacity of a bank official, using Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (on many an occasion) to further “dilute” the chain of title by obfuscating the path of ownership from the originating lender (many of which were bankrupt and out of business at the time the document was executed) to the current “alleged” owner of the mortgage loan.  Most of this process takes place within ninety (90) days AFTER a borrower allegedly stops making their mortgage loan payments.  Customarily, most of this scheme takes place within the walls of the mortgage loan servicer’s own document manufacturing plant or at a contractor-based, third-party document mill.

The scheme may involve witnesses also attesting to the signature of the alleged “officer” signing the assignment. Many times, these witnesses are notaries (who should know better).  Many times, these witnesses simply sit around the signing table, shuffling documents from person to person, all affixing their signatures to a pre-determined spot on the document.  All of these documents are then bundled up and taken to a different part of the building and placed on the desk of a notary who will then acknowledge the documents and affix the notary seal to each one, claiming the signers “personally appeared” before them, when in fact, THAT did not happen!

The scheme is designed to place everyone in the manufacturing chain at better than “arms length” away from the servicer, as a means to reduce liability.  This would bring this author to an obvious conclusion that it would be more difficult to seek out and depose those who participated in the scheme because of costs and time involved, making it virtually impossible to defend one’s property from theft by document fraud.

AND HERE IT IS … 2018 … AND …

… we still have not gotten past being dishonest about providing solid proof of effective transfer of the promissory note in conjunction with an assignment of a mortgage or deed of trust.

As the result of the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION, we learned that having local law enforcement investigate matters of this nature was way over their heads (let alone their pay grades).  They are either in denial or superbly arrogant about having to investigate what they said were “victimless crimes”.  The investigation involved the examination of documents in the land records from June 1, 2012 (after the AG settlement was reached) and June 1, 2014 (a 2-year span).   Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. was used as a research guide, because it led the examination team directly to all of the securitized RMBS documents, which contained continued patterns of everything I’ve described in this article.

As a means of education (because I can’t give legal advice) … let’s examine a couple of recently-filed documents:

In Osceola County, Florida, where we previously conducted an examination of their land records, paid for with Osceola County taxpayer dollars, I happened to find this recently-manufactured self assignment:

In the foregoing instance, I analyze the following suspect issues for your evaluation: 

(1.) This assignment of mortgage was done by JPMorgan Chase Bank’s own employees in their document manufacturing plant in Monroe, Louisiana on January 10, 2018.

(2.) The document could have been executed to Chase by Standard Pacific Mortgage, Inc., without the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., as Standard Pacific Mortgage, Inc. is still in business in Irvine, California. Why then did Chase employees, in a civil conspiracy with Nationwide Title Clearing, Inc. in Florida, have to then create this document?  Why didn’t the originating Lender create and execute the document?

(3.) If you’ll notice, “Judy G. Jackson”s printed name appears to have been inserted into the document by the party creating AND executing it.  The notary did not even fill in the space provided.

(4.) In this instance, the notary claims that Judy G. Jackson was “personally known, who did say that he/she/they” (the notary is too lazy to delineate for gender and plurality to make the document appear more legitimate). Nowhere in the document does it say that Louisiana Notary Amy Gott, who has a lifetime commission, actually “personally witnessed” Jackson’s signature.

(5.) There is no proof of authority anywhere on the document, indicating that Jackson had the authority to execute the instrument, which was signed on January 10, 2018.

(6.) The document misrepresents the mailing address for the lender as that of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.’s post office box in Flint, Michigan.

(7.) Notice that the Assignment of Mortgage ONLY “conveys” the Mortgage (and NOT the Note)?

(8.) The document was further obfuscated by the return address (after recording) as that of Nationwide Title Clearing, Inc. (“NTC”) in Palm Harbor, Florida (one of the companies targeted as a third-party document mill in the Osceola County Forensic Examination).  Why send it to NTC in the first place, unless NTC had something to do with its manufacture?

(9.) Notice the 1999 corporate seal for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.?  The employees at JPMorgan Chase Bank misrepresented their authority using “MERS” to obfuscate the chain of title.  NTC obviously has a document manufacturing, archive contract with Chase, which could be further played out through discovery.

(10.) You will notice from doing your own research that the use of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to obfuscate the chain of title with a “place card-type” position of the “nominee” (agent), has been used for so long that our very own United States Government and County Clerks and Recorders (who are blind, or reprobate, or both) simply choose to let this lie proliferate.

EXAMPLE #2: 

In the foregoing instance, I analyze the following suspect issues for your evaluation: 

(1.) This assignment of mortgage was done by a third-party document mill in their document manufacturing plant in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on February 21, 2018.

(2.) The originating Lender (IndyMac Bank, F.S.B., now out of business) obviously used Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to transfer its loans within the MERS® System via the use of a third-party mill, who couldn’t even be bothered to put the 1999 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. corporate seal on the document.

(3.) If you’ll notice, the party signing the document is using a non-designated “official title” for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.?   Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. only allows signers to use the titles of “Assistant Secretary” or “Vice President” (not as shown).

(4.) The pre-printed document contains the name of the signer in the notarial execution in all capital letters, which means it was inserted into the document using computer software.  The signer couldn’t even sign her own name in full.

(5.) Geez … every other Florida assignment I’ve seen had two (2) witness signatures contained within the document.  I guess these third-party doc mills don’t care if they follow Florida law or not, right?

(4.) Knowing how third-party document manufacturing plants behave, I would debate the use of the words “personally appeared”, given what we know about signing plant floor plans.

(5.) There is no proof of authority anywhere on the document, indicating that Salicce (the signer) had the authority to execute the instrument in that capacity, let alone have personal knowledge of its contents (robosigning).

(6.) The document doesn’t even list the mailing address for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., even though it claims to have an interest in the Assignment (as the “Assignor”) … pretty blatant huh?

(7.) Notice that the Assignment of Mortgage ONLY “conveys” the Mortgage (and NOT the Note)?

(8.) Notice that since IndyMac was out of business, a third-party document mill had to use Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. to obfuscate the chain of title to convey the mortgage (ONLY) into the REMIC directly, which by the way, had a cut-off date of June 1, 2005 and a Closing Date of June 15, 2005, in violation of the governing regulations for that REMIC, which can be found here: http://www.secinfo.com/dqTm6.z1en.htm.

(9.) Also notice that the name of the REMIC is incorrectly listed.  According to SEC records, the official name of the REMIC is the Indymac Home Equity Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Trust, Series Inabs 2005-B.  As far as I can see, there are are least three (3) distinct misrepresentations under Florida Criminal Code § 817.535 in the forgoing document.

(10.) Do we have possible notary fraud here?   Do you not see in the notarial execution where the notary claims to have acknowledged that Salicce (an employee of Visionet Systems Inc.) was an “Assistant Vice President” of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. when in fact, there is no such designation?  And from the scribbled signature of the notary, is it possible she executed this document without the signer being present and does this often enough to get writer’s cramp signing scribbled signatures a lot?  It might merit requesting her notary application from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania to see if that signature (on her application) matches the signature on this document.  Also notice the acknowledgment says nothing about “personally appeared” either.

By the way, the bold-faced type you see in the foregoing assignment is part of the boiler-plate software template used by document mills to create these suspect documents.

THIS BEHAVIOR ALSO COVERS “RELEASES OF MORTGAGES” AND “DEEDS OF RECONVEYANCE”

If you think that the foregoing behavior only applies to assignments, you should look at Releases of liens as well. Of particular note is the issue of potential unauthorized practice of law, which is a felony in Florida and most other states, for executing and recording documents known to contain false information (perjury) without attorney supervision.

I have successfully participated in removing (by expungement) a bogus Release of Mortgage out of the land records in Hillsborough County, Florida and the existing “alleged pretender lender” has absolutely no idea it now has a competing lien ahead of its foreclosure attempts.  This is why foreclosure law firm attorneys are so imbecilic when it comes to “getting their story straight” when they try to foreclose on a mortgage without FIRST checking the chain of title for competing liens … which brings me to my next point:

Any lawyer for the banks that comes into court and regurgitates these misrepresentations is likely to have committed not only felony perjury and potential multiple ethics violations … but any subsequent law firm will not be able to continue their tirade on the property once the initial violations have been exposed.

Perhaps it is now time to go after the foreclosure mill lawyers instead of just their clients!

My final parting shot goes against the state district and circuit attorneys who refuse to criminally prosecute these people.  Don’t yell at me!  You elected them!  You and I can both probably think to ourselves what worthless POS these people are if they aren’t going to do what’s right.

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

Dave Krieger is the author of the book Clouded Titles and has a weekly radio show on WKDW-FM in North Port, Florida covering consumer issues. He serves as a paralegal and chain of title consultant to attorneys as well as performs chain of title assessments for consumers as well as  forensic examinations and audits of county land records, despite the fact he is a disenfranchised citizen of whatever you want to call this economically messed up country you live in.

Coming soon … How to deal with the next financial collapse in America! 

2 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

UPDATE FROM MIAMI: TWO DITECH ATTORNEYS AND THEIR SCUMBAG WITNESS WON’T FACE THE MUSIC AFTER ALL!

(BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED) — 

UPDATE (September 29, 2018) … 

For those of you who were hoping that the SHTF for two Ditech attorneys and the witness for the servicer who allegedly gave false testimony at trial … we thought you’d like to see the research that we recently pulled out of the court record.   I am confused Judge Butchko?  

Green Tree Svcg LLC v Marin et al_Order Staying Indirect Criminal Contempt (Dec 14, 2017)

This kind of behavior could have been called out using “the system of things” the way it was designed … however, Foreclosure Defense Attorney Bruce Jacobs has not elected to utilize those designations, especially when he knew they were available.  Since then (in this case), counsel for the Plaintiff (Green Tree) has changed.  It appears there are several lawyers involved in the fray now.  All of them, as we peel back the layers of the onion, could be tested as to how the system of things is supposed to work.  We’ll see as time progresses through what is now an apparent 3-year-old case. 

Several media outlets, including the Daily Business Review, Miami New Times and Law.com are all reporting that the two Ditech Financial LLC attorneys are slated to face Miami-Dade Judge Beatrice Butchko on February 1, 2018, pending their appeal to stop the proceedings.

Miami-Dade Judge Beatrice Butchko

Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Beatrice Butchko ordered a non-jury trial date (which amounts to a “trial to the bench”, similar to foreclosure proceedings where a judge gets to rule unilaterally instead of the matter going to a jury of peers) for February 1, 2018, where Florida attorneys Yacenda Hudson and Amina McNeil have to show why they should not be held in criminal contempt of court for not producing Ditech manuals which explain the company’s record-keeping processes, which the lawyers finally did produce for opposing counsel, Bruce Jacobs of Jacobs-Keeley, a prominent Miami-Dade law firm this blog poster is directly familiar with.

Jacobs, himself a former prosecutor, has chastised the behavior of Hudson and McNeil and their witness from Ditech, Christopher Ogden, who Miami-Dade Circuit Court Judge Pedro Escharte, Jr. has implied “gave false testimony in an effort to introduce the prior servicer’s records into evidence under false pretenses.”

Amina McNeil, Tromberg Law Group

Yacenda Hudson, Tromberg Law Group

Hudson and McNeil have hired their own lawyers, who filed multiple motions in an effort to derail the upcoming hearing.  If the attorneys are found in contempt, Judge Butchko has threatened referral to the Florida Bar, which could take up the matter for disciplinary actions against both lawyers.

Jacobs has characterized the opposing counsels’ behavior as an “attack on the integrity” of the court system.

The entire matter revolves around the “loan boarding process” over a property in West Kendall, Florida, where Jacobs demand that Ditech produce its manuals, which Ogden stated to the court contained company mandates about how processes in servicing of loans were to be conducted.  As it appears, those manuals say nothing giving credence to Ogden’s testimony in Escharte’s court about accuracy-checking processes that Ogden claimed existed.  Judge Escharte claims the company willfully lied in court to protect itself; however, the outcome in equity was that it sought to steal someone’s home by whatever means necessary.  Does that sound familiar to any of you?

It further appears that the “bugs” in the relationship between Ditech and the servicer it acquired, Green Tree Servicing, have come home to infest Ditech with more serious issues, which other attorneys and litigants could learn from.  The articles also mention a similarly-flawed process in loan boarding conducted by Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, which Judge Butchko characterized as “legal fiction”.

Anyone facing Ditech or Ocwen in court should now be able to use this flaw as an attack strategy in their own cases. Any time that either of these two entities bring their servicer representative to court to testify, all one would seemingly have to do is a little research into what questions to ask to tie them up into a nice, neat, little bow, to be set on fire later when they can’t produce the documents they’re relying on.

What the court systems in Florida are sadly just now coming to recognize is that the crap that we’ve known about in document manufacturing, robosigning and drafting up bogus powers of attorneys and corporate resolutions to cover up the banking industries lies have been ongoing since securitization kicked into high gear at the dawn of the new millennium.  To me, the rest of the justices across the country are either in denial or they’ve been bribed to go with the flow.  What goes around comes around.  Karma’s a bitch!

For more details, click on this pdf: Criminal Contempt Proceedings Go Forward Against Boca Raton Attorneys | Daily Business Review

I posted the attorneys’ pictures in this blog post in case you happen to face them in court … I don’t think I have to tell you how to proceed when they’re the opposing counsel.  Know thine enemy whilst thou art in the way with him …

For those of you who wish to see more evidence of fraud and misrepresentation on the court, click this pdf:

OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION

Happy Holidays from Clouded Titles Blog!

8 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, OP-ED

Nothing has changed much in Washington State, post-Bain!

Op-Ed —

August 16, 2012 is a day that will go down in Washington State’s history when it comes to dealing with the issues created by the licensed lenders in that State who rely on MERS to cover up “dead spots” in the chain of title to properties.  I’m attaching the Supreme Court’s en banc ruling to refresh your memory and to fill in any gaps that might be missing in your thought process.

BAIN V METROPOLITAN MORTGAGE GROUP, INC. ET AL

Only a handful of states in the union agreed with the Washington Supreme Court’s decision insofar that MERS was NOT a real “beneficiary” because it didn’t loan any money and therefore, had no interest in the borrower’s promissory note.  In fact, during the oral arguments presented before the Supreme Court, counsel for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (not “MERS”, which means MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.; I’ll explain in a moment) could NOT identify WHO owned Kristin Bain’s mortgage loan! That didn’t bode well before the justices, who were stunned at the lack of knowledge and almost sheer arrogance of MERSCORP’s counsel.

You see, what the Washington State Supreme Court justices were never presented with, and thus did not have in evidence to be able to make a determination of, is that the Rules enacted by the parent of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. (then MERSCORP, Inc.), specifically note that under Rule 1 § 1, when the term “MERS” is used, it means the PARENT, NOT THE CHILD!  Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. is THE CHILD. The lack of knowledge by the attorneys for the homeowners (for Bain and Selkowitz) and the deliberate omission of MERS’s own “rules” by its representative counsel should be cause for alarm in the way cases are being litigated all across the country!

THE PARENT AND THE CHILD ARE NOT THE SAME!

In fact, they are two distinctly separate Delaware corporations. This was a contrived scheme of mass proportions, created in favor of the banks, which caused tens of millions of fraudulent and misrepresentative documents to be recorded into the land records of all 3,041 counties, townships and boroughs in the United States, literally clouding titles to over 80-million properties!

Thus, when Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. shows up in any legal proceeding, it’s the “empty shell” (a bankruptcy-remote entity with no assets or liabilities; no income or expenses; and no employees) that shows up in court … NOT THE PARENT!  MERSCORP is footing the legal costs in every proceeding (because it is a roughly $2.7-billion a year business model) that operates and argues on the flawed idea that the agent (nominee) and the beneficiary can be one in the same party.

The Tennessee Supreme Court completely gutted the MERS business model in the Ditto decision. MERS v DITTO_TN Supreme Court rules against MERS!  To NOT understand all of the basic tenets of real property and mortgage law could be fatal to you in your foreclosure case!

This is why I am hosting the Foreclosure Defense Workshop in Orlando on September 30-October 1, 2017.  (see below)

Part of the “good fight” in dealing in foreclosure actions is knowing the truth and how to find it (or go after a determination to get at it).  This is a lot of what we are teaching in the workshop, even if you’re going pro se!

You have little time to make reservations, because airfare is going up the closer you get to the date and the number of seats to the event has dramatically shrunk.  If you are even thinking of remotely preparing yourself to “fight the good fight”, you need to be at this event!  Since Hurricane Irma hit Florida and knocked out a lot of the internet connections, many Florida consumers won’t know about this event until this weekend and likely, there will be an onslaught of registrations at the last minute.

FDW ORLANDO REGISTRATION FORM

Meanwhile, back in Washington State … 

It appears that the regulatory agencies that govern the behavior of the banks aren’t falling all over themselves to stop the continual process of recording documents in the land records that makes use of MERS as a “beneficiary”, post-Bain.  Here is one such Consent Order, issued in 2017, that exemplifies my point (sent to me by one of the readers of this blog):

Planet Home Lending

The Consent Order appears to have noted that a violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act [RCW 31.04.027(2) and (13)] occurred when Planet Home Lending, a lender licensed under Washington law to conduct business in the State, caused several Assignments of Deeds of Trust to be filed in counties all across Washington State, post-Bain, characterizing MERS “as the beneficiary when MERS did not hold the corresponding promissory note.”

While I was not provided with any specific Assignment to review, I would guess (and my guesses are usually pretty right on) that the Assignment was created by employees of the servicer of the loan. Recognizing this scenario is important for two key reasons:

  1. If a consumer is economically affected by the recording of one of these subject, suspect Assignments, the consumer would have to assert a specific violation of the foregoing state statutes; and
  2. If the Assignment of Deed of Trust used MERS to characterize the Assignor as a “beneficiary”, post-Bain, for the purposes of transferring any rights in the note to a REMIC, or even more importantly, to the servicer, who then commences a foreclosure action against the Property, then there may also be a violation of 15 U.S.C. §§ 1641(f) and (g), the Federal Consumer Protection Act.

Through the use of the federal citation, the case then becomes a federal issue, so one would have to get a competent attorney to sort through which would be more effective to prove (as a Plaintiff) against Planet Home Lending, the violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act (which has a supporting Consent Order to apply to the case as evidence) or the Federal version of the same.

The problem is however, that the Consent Order implies that Planet Home Lending didn’t admit to guilt, even though the State found violations of the foregoing Act (under Agreement and Order Paragraph C). For all intents and purposes, the Order basically said, “Don’t do it again!” and by agreement, any further violations of the Order would be dealt with in the future (to what extent, we do not know).

Now, I can surmise that all of the litigious folk out there affected by the issuance of this Consent Order have realized that there is nothing stopping a consumer from bringing a private right of action against Planet Home Lending (or any other lender or servicer violating the Washington CPA). However, I caution those considering such to use due diligence in determining “damage”, whether actual, compensatory, exemplary or punitive.  Without some sort of financial loss, it may be more difficult to press forward with a CPA violation claim.

That being said, it appears that suit may be brought under the foregoing state statutes in lieu of any decision like Yvanova v New Century Mortgage Corp. et al (California) and Miller v. BAC Home Loans Servicing, LP, 726 F. 3d 717 – Court of Appeals, 5th Circuit 2013 – Google (Texas) that gives consumers the right to challenge the creation of (and subsequent recording of) a suspect document affecting chain of title in the land records of any county in Washington State.  This may also apply in other Consumer Protection Act-related statutes across the country, but it is likely that a consumer would have to conduct some pretty specific discovery (against the mortgage loan servicers’ employees and notaries) to see who ordered the creation of the document and who caused it to be manufactured, for what purpose and determine accountability.

It should also be noted that civil conspiracy is defined in virtually every state statute.  While this term does not in of itself, constitute a cause of action in the literal sense, the act of one or more actors getting together and conspiring to do a thing to scheme that adversely affects the economic or financial well-being of another would certainly be an issue to be considered.

In Florida, for example, Florida Criminal Code § 817.535 makes it a third-degree felony to record a document containing false and misrepresentative information with the intent to deprive another of their property.  While consumers cannot commence criminal proceedings directly, they can file a criminal complaint with the local sheriff’s department (the county land records are the sheriff’s jurisdiction) and pursue a criminal case that way, especially if discovery shows that a civil conspiracy to create the document indeed occurred. You should understand that (based on our past dealings with a certain sheriff’s department) detectives at the county level are either lazy, in defiance of or lack the knowledge to properly and fully investigate such matters, as evidenced by the Osceola County Sheriff’s Department, who could find no wrongdoing in the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION.

The foregoing subject matter is only PART OF what we’re going to cover in the upcoming Foreclosure Defense Workshop.  Thus, the tools and weapons that pro se litigants and litigants being represented by counsel are being refined to be more effective and the means by which documents are challenged has also been refined (AND PROVEN) to work!  There are three specific things I’m going to be sharing at the workshop in this regard, in addition to the newly-developed tactics by Rich Kalinoski, the attorney lecturing to those attending this workshop.

Again, this is the ONLY workshop we’re doing in 2017.  We have not decided whether we’re going to do another workshop again. Rich is very busy implementing his new developments and for this reason, may stifle any efforts to conduct a workshop in the future.  Know this … legal tools will be available to all of those who attend!

In the meantime, keep researching and “fighting the good fight”.

Dave Krieger is the author of several books, including Clouded Titles, available on his website.  He consults attorneys in foreclosure matters and drafts pleadings and conducts research for attorneys and litigants. Mr. Krieger is Managing Member of DK Consultants LLC in San Antonio, Texas. 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED, workshop

MERS and its “Parent” are trying to invade Oregon again, despite Supreme Court ruling!

BREAKING NEWS — 

For those of you in Oregon, you should be writing your legislators, especially the ones who are trying to pass the following Senate Bill (968), which would put MERS back into legislative existence again in Oregon, despite the Oregon Supreme Court’s rulings in Niday and Brandrup:

SB 968 (Oregon trying to legislate MERS into existence again)

This just goes to show you that MERSCORP Holdings, Inc., who, along with several major banks, settled a $9-million lawsuit brought by Multnomah County, is now trying to do an “end run” to get itself legally back in the game, this time using the Oregon State Legislature.

It’s time to start “ramping up” against those sponsoring the bill!

Anyone want to retain a private investigator to dig up dirt on (taken from the top of the bill):

Senator JOHNSON, Representative OLSON, Senator HANSELL; Senators BAERTSCHIGER JR, FERRIOLI, Representatives BARKER, CLEM, WITT?

If anything, legislators don’t like seeing smut printed about them on the Internet.  It’s bad for politics.

However, what they are attempting to do is BAD for Oregon homeowners.  The Oregon Supreme Court already made it clear they didn’t want MERS being a nominee or a beneficiary in the State of Oregon. What part of that don’t these legislators get?

It’s called bribery! 

I know.  Harsh wording … but MERS and its parent are paying someone somewhere, through lobbyists, whatever, to put this legislation into effect so it can continue to f**k Oregon homeowners as part of a renewed securitization effort.  I want to see them all in prison.

As to the OSCEOLA COUNTY FORENSIC EXAMINATION … we are not done yet.

This author is not going to stop ranting on MERS and its band of delusionary Board of Directors, who think that the legislature in every state should accord a private entity its own legislation to ply its flawed business model on Americans, most of whom don’t have  a clue as to what is going on.  I personally think these Oregon legislators are on the “take” and so should you!   Time to start making phone calls, if you get my drift, especially if you live in Oregon. These legislators need to be “exposed” for their wrongdoing.

This also goes to show you that with Fannie Mae lowering its borrowing standards, investors are about to get bufu’d again by the major banks.  One would think that with all of the investor lawsuits going on that it should be very clear that the securitization system implemented by and through the major banking cartels are out to destroy the “full faith and credit” of each of us, one home at a time!

SAY “NO!” TO MERS MORTGAGES! 

7 Comments

Filed under BREAKING NEWS, Securitization Issues