Tag Archives: pro se litigants

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 10

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

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

HOW TO BANKRUPT ANY COUNTY IN AMERICA IN TEN EASY STEPS

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

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

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

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

FIRST AND FOREMOST EVIDENCE: THE PUBLIC RECORD    

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

THE LACKING COMPONENT: STATUTORY APPLICATIONS OF VIOLATIONS

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

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

THE LACKING COMPONENT: ETHICAL VIOLATIONS

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

THE LACKING COMPONENT: JUDICIAL SYSTEM CHALLENGES

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

7 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 6

(OP-ED, first posted: September 11, 2018) —

The writer of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  Any use of the theories or ideas suggested in this post is entirely at your discretion and will probably result in disaster without the proper legal help.

In my last episode (Part 5) of this series of posts, I talked about risk aversion and the creation of a paper trail.  In this episode, I cover the “why” this becomes necessary.

DOCUMENTATION IN SUPPORT OF A CLAIM

The very first thing I look at (as a title consultant) is the chain of title, especially the warranty or grant deed (proof of ownership), the mortgage (or deed of trust) and any subsequent assignments coming against the chain of title.  All of these documents (in certified form) become the initial evidence in support of any claim I may have against a law firm, a judge or any other party that put that false and misrepresentative information into the public record and then relied on it to steal my property.  After all, in judicial states, where I see most of the atrocities committed, the foreclosure mill attorneys are the ones attaching these documents in their pleadings, as exhibits, or in the alternative, making reference to said exhibits, to be used as evidence to support their complaints to justify the foreclosure.

The pleadings themselves (in original or amended form) also become part of the evidence package in support of my claim, because they contain the language that relies on the false and misrepresentative statements where an assignment was posited or referenced therein as evidence in support of their claim.  This package should include every single document placed within the court docket, including the index sheet … certified copies (and 1 plain copy for review). 

You’re probably asking yourself where the promissory note comes into play here, because judicial states mandate you have to have the original note in order to foreclose. In non-judicial states, possession of the note is not required to foreclose; thus, all foreclosures are assumed to be legal unless otherwise challenged.  This means that if you’re in one of the non-judicial states, you have to institute suit based on the chain of title you have, in order to start the paper trail.  Thus, non-judicial state property owners are at a distinct disadvantage because they must spend the money filing a lawsuit to stop the foreclosure and obtain a temporary restraining order (TRO) and they are limited at best as to what is provable and what isn’t because the other side has not responded to the suit.  You can’t make boisterous claims either, as you will be denied the TRO and that is what you’re seeking to shut down the foreclosure sale.   You see, until the other side responds, they’ve created no paper trail you can assert contains false and misrepresentative statements, which is why I like using a C & E (an acronym for Cancellation & Expungement Complaint) “right out of the gate” if I realize I might not be able to make my mortgage loan payments any more.  Waiting until the 11th hour to file one of these Complaints (in of itself) has been definitely proven to be a waste of time and financial resources.  Filing a wrongful foreclosure action (before the fact) is also a waste of time and financial resources because the foreclosure has not occurred yet (and this is supported by case law).  I mention all of this because your research becomes fundamental as part of creating the paper trail.

Any oral statements made in court have to be supported by some sort of record.  This is why we have court reporters.  Most pro se litigants and uneducated homeowners conveniently forget to retain a court reporter to document everything said in open court to their disadvantage. This means that with no court record, there’s nothing to take up on appeal or challenge because you’ve “stiffed” yourself out of a paper trail.  Besides, having a court reporter has been shown to keep the judge honest.  Don’t think that just because the county can afford to have its own court reporter there means you can simply rely on getting a copy of the transcript from the county’s court reporter.  They are backlogged with work and will take their time getting anything to you, at a time when having a transcript of the proceedings might be timely necessary.  This always works to the homeowner’s disadvantage.  That is deliberate!  Why?  Because the county is using its own court reporter to “cover its own ass” and you can bet stuff will be left out of the record.  Then it’s your word against the county’s.  So, tis better to get your own court reporter!  You need to create your own “timely paper trail” for future use and reference.  This is not a traffic ticket we’re talking about here!

Discovery is vital whether or not you are doing a C & E (which allows you to do discovery of the party executing the assignment and the notary who acknowledged the assignment) or a full-blown complaint to stop the foreclosure.  Discovery responses becomes part of your evidence package … and the “paper trail”!  If you don’t propound discovery on the other side or at least the relevant parties (the ones who created the assignment), you’re on a sinking ship.  All of the discovery (and the responses you get) become part of the paper trail.

Depositions are a must!  These are taken using a court reporter who writes down every single word that is spoken and many of them use video cameras (which is allowed) to take taped statements, which is even more intimidating.  I find that going after the creator of the document, the executor of the document and the notary who acknowledged the document are vital to creating a proper paper trail (not so much the creator of the document, unless you’re trying to solidify that the law firm or servicer was involved in a civil conspiracy with the agents who executed the assignment).  You’re only talking a minimum of TWO DEPOSITIONS here … the executor of the assignment and the notary who acknowledged it.  What authority did they have to execute the document?  Where is the notary’s bond?  Is there even a bond?  Can we attack the notary’s commission even though there is no bonding requirement?  YOU BET!  Attacking a notary’s bond (if there is one to go after) can be a source of cash flow to support your court fight. You can bet the other side will object to everything you ask for because they don’t want anything said on the record that can be used against them in court.

In all matters related to your case, PHONE CALLS DO NOT WORK!  You cannot take phone calls into court!  DO NOT CALL THE NOTARY!  Do not contact the notary by mail!  If you’re sending them a subpoena to appear at a deposition … their deposition … you do it through a process server … which is also a legitimate part of your paper trail!   I have people who have contacted me who do exactly what I just suggested NOT TO DO.  They scare the notary into hiding.  When it does come time to serve them with a subpoena, they can’t be found.  Duh!  And these people actually think they’re doing the right thing?  Seriously?  What part of desperation is incorporated into stupidity?  This is where you have to put your emotions aside and start thinking “common sense”.

THE EXPERT WITNESS AFFIDAVIT AND LIVE COURT TESTIMONY

I’m talking “expert witness attorney” here, not your average forensic loan or securitization auditor (who thinks they’re an expert witness).  Why an attorney for an expert witness?  Allow me to re-arrange your brain’s priorities through the following three reasons:

REASON #1: Litigation Consultant … your expert witness attorney can also serve as a litigation consultant to help you frame some damning discovery centered around statutory violations!  This is important because using the stuff I mentioned previously in The Quiet Title War Manual has nothing to do whether or not you can challenge assignments because you’re not a third-party beneficiary.  That is a bullshit banking argument that has nothing to do with the statute in question!  The statutes speak directly to the recording of documents known to contain false and misrepresentative information!  Separate the two distinctions in your mind because the borrower’s name is in the assignment; the borrower is a party to securitization (if that’s an issue) and because the document involves misrepresentations that may include “MERS” (in whatever form), which claim that Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. had something to do with negotiating the instrument (the note), which runs contrary to what’s in the assignment, generally.

REASON #2: Personal Knowledge of the Facts … this happens when the expert witness attorney reviews all of your documents.  He can testify as to their factual basis AND render a legal opinion … BOTH under oath and under penalty of perjury as a lawyer!  This is way different than having a so-called “expert” that’s NOT an attorney testify as to anything factual … they can’t give legal opinions; otherwise, in doing so, their testimony could be impeached or effectively diluted under cross examination. Not only that … because the attorney who serves as your expert witness is sitting in the court (prior to giving his testimony), he actually gleans personal knowledge listening to the other side’s attorney further the false and misrepresentative information to the court … for which the damage is immediate (see In re Wilson, U.S. Bkpt Ct E.D. La No 07-11862, Memorandum of Law in Support of the United States Trustee’s Motion for Sanctions against Lender Processing Services, Inc. and the Boles Law Firm), which says:

“Untruthful statements made in bankruptcy proceedings undermine the integrity of the bankruptcy process. The bankruptcy system relies on the candor and accuracy of information presented by all parties, creditors and debtors alike. To ensure candor before this Court and to protect the integrity of the bankruptcy system, this Court should impose on Fidelity and Boles monetary sanctions and other non-monetary relief as this Court deems appropriate pursuant to its inherent authority to sanction abusive litigants coming before the Court, and pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).”  And from the following footnote, No. 16):

“Rule 9011 provides a 20 day “safe harbor” in which a party may withdraw the challenged written representations, unless they are contained in the bankruptcy petition. If the challenged paper is withdrawn, it would not be considered by the court in its decision making process. However, there can be no safe harbor for untruthful statements made in open court, because the harm that results is likely to be immediate.”

(I just told you the Expert Witness Attorney would be there to hear all of the “immediate” misrepresentations.)  This is an actual case where Wells Fargo Bank got hit with a $1.3-million sanction!

This is an attorney, namely, the Bankruptcy Trustee, reporting misconduct! He is telling the other side (through his memorandum, they’ve been given fair warning to recant what they’ve placed into the court record).   If you didn’t catch that so far … let me make sure to clarify this in the following “reason”:

REASON #3: Rule 8.3 – Reporting Professional Misconduct … this is a mandated state bar rule (how many foreclosure defense attorneys actually follow it?)

(a) A lawyer who knows that another lawyer has committed a violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct that raises a substantial question as to that lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects, shall inform the appropriate professional authority.

(b) A lawyer who knows that a judge has committed a violation of applicable rules of judicial conduct that raises a substantial question as to the judge’s fitness for office shall inform the appropriate authority.

The foregoing mandates (which is what “shall” means, not “may”) are put there to hold attorneys accountable to report misconduct. What forensic loan auditor or securitization auditor is mandated by the Bar’s own rules to to this?  Come on, think?  Where’s the mandate?

(long pause, heavy sigh)  Come up with one yet? Didn’t think so.

This means that when the expert witness comes into personal knowledge of the facts that the other side’s lawyer has committed felony perjury by making false and misrepresentative statements in open court, he has a mandated duty (for which the State Bar must listen) to report the other lawyer’s misconduct!

This also means that if the judge hearing your case doesn’t give a shit and let’s this scumbag attorney for the bank say whatever he wants and get away with it and hands your property over to the bank AFTER your expert witness attorney advises (through a legal opinion) that the other side’s lawyer, in both pleadings and exhibits and oral statements made, has committed misconduct, not only is the judge exposed and now at risk, but the county he is employed by may also be “on the hook”.

At least bankruptcy judges have the decency to “do the right thing”.  I recently noted the results of the Sundquist ruling in California.  Sundquist-Memo-Opinion

A lot of this depends on how “stacked” your paper trail is and what evidence of misconduct you were able to actually PROVE (not just assert).

EXPOSED RISK FACTORS 

BTW, for those of you “Patriots” out there … a majority of the judges’ oaths of office I’ve seen were actually recorded in the public record in the county they serve in!  This is important to recognize the WHY you’d want a certified copy of their oath of office.   THE PAPER TRAIL!   It’s proof he/she (as a judge) is serving IN THAT COUNTY!

Most counties are self-insured.  The county has either a County Executive or Risk Manager who handles their claims because of something an employee did wrong.  Who would think to tag a judge?   After all, aren’t the judges bonded?   What happens if the bond is attacked, challenged and successfully revoked?   The judge can’t sit on the bench, right?  He will probably be placed on administrative leave while the county investigates what happened.  But that’s not all the county has to worry about.

As a result of the trial or hearing (whether it be evidentiary or just one of those 5-minute “rocket docket” style pieces of crap), there are two other complaints that must be reported … a complaint on the lawyer to the State Bar that can discipline him … and a complaint on the judge to the appropriate judicial authority.  More paper trail to show the County … to give them fair warning that they need to step up or face the consequences!

ALL OF THIS HAS TO BE DONE BY THE EXPERT WITNESS ATTORNEY … WHO IS MANDATED TO “PULL THE TRIGGER”!   PRO SE LITIGANTS (who think they know more than the expert witness attorney) WILL ONLY F**K THIS UP IF THEY TRY TO DO IT THEMSELVES (calling into the county or the bar or the judicial review board and whining about their silly little issues, or filing crap judicial misconduct complaints, which is how the major insurance players in this game will view their cheap efforts to avoid having to pay for an expert witness attorney).  I put this part in the back end of this post as a caveat, because it’s the expert witness attorney who has the “big stick of dynamite with the short fuse” … NOT YOU! 

It gets better … stay tuned for another round of insight into the insurance game in the next segment! The title companies are also in this up to their ears (among other places)!

6 Comments

Filed under OP-ED

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 3

(OP-ED, first posted: September 1, 2018) —

The writer of this post is a paralegal and consultant to attorneys on matters involving chain of title, foreclosures and document manufacturing.  The opinions expressed herein are that of the writer’s only and do not constitute legal or financial advice.  The author apologizes in advance for the graphic depiction of anything necessary (in the extreme) to shock your conscience into understanding that this is not recommended for you to try on your own. 

At some point in the equation, you are going to have to put your trust in someone that has (at least) studied “the system of things” and understands (basically) where it leads and how to approach it.

AGAIN … DO NOT TRY THIS AT HOME!  YOU’VE BEEN WARNED!  I am sharing talking points about a system here, not a boilerplate method where you get to exact revenge.  The following could be your end result if you attempt to do this yourself:

I just recently received a copy of the autopsy of Martin Wirth, a Park County, Colorado resident that was shot to death during an eviction process by the Sheriff’s Department. Another Sheriff’s deputy was shot to death, but after what I read in the autopsy findings, I find it hard to believe that Wirth had anything to do with the deputy’s death. After Waco and Tillman, we know that friendly fire deaths are indeed probable and cannot be ruled out.  In fact, the coroner’s findings were (from the Summary):

The autopsy reveals eleven entrance gunshot wounds involving the full spectrum of the back with a predominance of the mid-back. The autopsy further reveals five exit wounds involving the lower right neck and the mid and upper chest. A sixth exit wound is located in the upper abdomen, in the midline. At the autopsy, three bullets were retrieved outside the body. One bullet is found in the clothing related to the chest; a second bullet is found under the head while removing the clothing; a third bullet is retrieved from the body bag. Two large caliber bullets are recovered from the right and left anterior chest wall. One large caliber bullet remains deeply embedded in the left pelvis. The extensive internal injuries in this case associated with six anterior exit wounds preclude a precise definition of wound tracts.

For those of you who need an explanation, “anterior exit wounds” are sustained as the result of being shot in the back while running away from the gunfire!  How is one able to kill a Sheriff’s deputy while under siege, running out the back door of his home?  We have not heard the whole story. Was there a cover-up?  The news media reported that Wirth shot the deputies as they entered his residence.  They returned fire.  “Wirth died at the scene.”  (media reports)  What scene?  The autopsy said Wirth was found outside of his home on the ground.  How did he get outside (where the coroner’s report said his body was found) if he “died inside” upon return fire of the deputies?  There are a lot of unexplained scenarios here, ones the media can’t hold a candle to.

Based on what history has taught us, Wirth ended up being demonized in the media, just like Randy Weaver and David Koresh.  And let’s not forget Nevada notary Tracy N. Lawrence, who suddenly died of a 3-drug cocktail overdose on the day of her sentencing for one count of notary fraud (she offered to testify against two title officers of LSI Title Agency, Inc.).  Her death was ruled a suicide; however, I know dozens of Texas county clerks that would disagree with that finding because they were presented with those facts at the lecture series I presented to them in 2012. You could see their jaws drop. They were all shaking their head “no”.

You’re probably asking yourself why I intended to post this information.  I bring this up now because of the serious nature of attacking (on your own, because you think you can do better than someone with legal skill, knowledge and a law license) entities outside the scope of your foreclosure case.  I can think of a half dozen people that will ignore my warning here and risk ending up dead or in jail because they won’t listen to reason.  Sometimes I wonder why I even share stuff like this because it’s like giving a baby a stick of dynamite with a short fuse.  What you don’t know could kill you!  Did I scare the shit out of you yet?  You need to understand how serious this stuff is! I don’t know of any other way to emphasize what can happen to you if you self-implement, unless you’d care to Google David Koresh’s autopsy photos to see what an “end result” looks like!

Lest we forget, authorities came in and bulldozed over the “crime scene” at the Mount Carmel “compound”, obliterating any evidence.  A “compound” is defined as a 10′ x 10′ plywood shack (re: Weaver) or the average foreclosure victim’s home (re: Wirth) or the openly multiple-building, communal-style home (re: Branch Davidians).  Take your pick.  What’s behind Door #3?   None of them had fences and razor wire around them, so I have a hard time believing these fit the definition of a “compound”.  Oops!! I forgot.  That’s the term the government uses when it wants to demonize you in the media, so it can get the support of decent, hard-working, taxpaying voters who will support everything they’ve done under suspicious circumstances.

Now let’s get to the sum and substance of “the system of things” …

BONDS AND BONDING

Bonds can come in the form of cash or surety.  I want you to focus on these two and stop thinking about how the counties monetize bail bonds or bonds on their subjects they have detained or arrested.  This has nothing to do with the subject matter, but rather has evolved from Patriot-style behaviors, which I abhor, as this will get you put in jail or worse.

County judges and notaries commissioned by the state (or commonwealth) generally have to have a bond.  Some states do not require a notary bond; thus, the state itself may be held responsible for removing that requirement because a nexus was created when the Secretary of State issued a notary commission to the individual committing the crime (notarizing documents that contain false and misrepresentative information).  If the state doesn’t require a bond, then the notary is acting under the authority of the Secretary of State issuing the commission and thus, we would look to the state to cough up damage money as the result of felony behavior before the court.  What I’m talking about (in brief) here is the idea that bonds can be attacked; however, THIS TOO has to be done properly.  Every “punch line” HAS TO HAVE A “set-up”!

When a cop shoots somebody, what happens?  The cop is generally put on administrative leave while an investigation takes place.  Then a decision is made as to liability (whether the cop should be charged with murder or whether the shooting was justifiable).

What happens when a judge is required to have a bond and tolerates felony behavior in his court?   If someone challenges his bond, he may be placed on administrative leave while an investigation takes place and liability is determined.  There is a right way and a wrong way to even get close to challenging a judge’s bond.  Don’t think that attacking a judge’s bond won’t create statewide attention BECAUSE IT WILL!  Within 24 hours, every court official in the state will know it happened.

PATRIOT-STYLE CRAP

Some people think that filing liens against a judge is cute and that the judge will get his comeuppance.  THIS will get you a jail term, or worse.  I had a COTA workshop attendee do a year and a day for filing a lien against a state judge.  So if you like prison, try doing stupid shit like this!  All filing the lien does is screws up the judge’s credit until necessary measures (which involve spending money) are implemented to delete the lien from the public record.  Filing false liens is a felony in most states.  Please do not call me collect from your jail cell if you act the fool and file one of these liens against a judge because I will not bail you out!  You would be surprised how folks you know well distance themselves from you once you’ve been arrested and jailed!  Let me jog your memory because the State of Missouri just passed a new law (worth the read):

Missouri-2018-HB1769-Enrolled

I don’t know if you picked up on this or not, but Paragraphs 8 & 9 of this new bill appear to provide the framework in Missouri to do a C&E (I have taught this method in previous foreclosure defense workshops).    We do not file any type of liens as part of the process I am talking about here.  We do file a lis pendens.  The suit involves real property.  We have a methodology that requires precision in the creation of a paper trail.  THIS is what gets judges removed from the bench, not your pro se filing of judicial misconduct complaints.  Filing these is also a mistake, because most pro se litigants file them because they didn’t like the judge’s ruling.  Sorry, but that is what the appellate process is for.  I have heard that Patriot-type radio talk show hosts advocate doing this repeatedly to upset the system of things.  Taking that advice will lead you to a 6 x 8 cell with three hots and a cot.  The nature of judicial misconduct is reporting egregious behavior, like condoning felony perjury on behalf of the bank’s counsel.  THAT is what you file judicial misconduct complaints for.  This is why counties, most of whom are self-insured, get nervous when their Risk Managers are approached about this type of subject matter.  DO NOT CONTACT THEM YOURSELF!  We have a method for “getting their attention”!

THE BIGGEST, BADDEST PAPER TRAIL YOU CAN IMAGINE

I cannot stress to you enough that discovery and obtaining documented evidence and employing expert witness affidavits and testimony in the creation of a well-documented paper trail is ESSENTIAL to any success using this plan; otherwise, what do you have worth investigating.  I’ve yet to see a pro se litigant conduct proper discovery, let alone understand rules of civil procedure and rules of evidence to finality in their favor.  A majority of those reading this article won’t even know (if asked outright) what a declaratory judgment action is, let alone a state tort claims action.  The system of things may be overwhelming to many of you, but according to attorneys I’ve spoken with, it’s an eventual Achille’s heel in the system.  One attorney stated, “It’s a game changer!”  When counties don’t have money, they can’t function properly.   Government officials have to answer to voters and the media about the problem created by you, which is why they’ll try to settle before it becomes a 3-ring media circus.

As one attorney put it … you can change things with your vote … or you can change things employing specific tactics against “the system of things”.   I discuss this for educational purposes, because I get so many calls from frustrated foreclosure victims, who don’t know where to turn.  The problem is, the homeowners don’t know how to create the right paper trail.  Hell, I know attorneys that have stopped short of doing the right thing.  Malpractice is also a concern and with the tactics inside “the system of things”, these foreclosure defense attorneys should be worried as well, because “what applies to the goose can be applied to the gander”!

Without “the system of things” in place, we would succumb to financial ruin as a body politic and that could lead to the Civil War that the Rasmussen poll recently talked about.  I am not advocating the use of violence here, just common sense.

More to come about “the system of things” … so you can understand its layout and consequences!

 

6 Comments

Filed under 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

FIVE REASONS NOT TO AVOID SERVICE OF PROCESS!

(OP-ED) —

I just received an email from a homeowner which stated that he “refused” service of process.

I flew into a fit of rage.  It took me 10 minutes just to calm down before answering his actions.

By nature, we have a tendency to avoid conflict.  We don’t like confrontation.  A process server coming to your door, at any hour of the day or night, means that a confrontation is about to occur which is at best unsettling, causing conflict in your life.  In the case of a married couple, you can expect that once a process server delivers their spate of bad news, you can bet that there will be immediate strife in the household.  Tempers flare.  Blood pressure goes up. Insomnia due to worry sets in.  For all practical purposes, emotion rules.  Common sense goes right out the window.  So, naturally, our tendency is to avoid service.  I believe this is wrong (and so do many attorneys I’ve talked to).  So I’ve put together a list of 5 brief reasons why NOT to avoid (or in the alternative) refuse service of process.

REASON #1: You won’t know who your enemies are! 

You’ve heard the old saying, “Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.”  This saying came about for a reason, especially in the legal profession.

When you don’t understand WHO is coming after you, you won’t know how to establish an “End Game Strategy” to beat down the action being taken against you.

REASON #2: You won’t know why your enemies (whoever they may be) are coming after you! 

If homeowners (as Borrowers on a Note) haven’t been able to make their mortgage payments, chances are likely they’ll figure out why a process server is attempting service of process … because the bank (or servicer) wants their money and they are tired of waiting.  On occasion, a servicer will send out notices (in the form of door hangers) through their local contacts, tipping off homeowners that service of process for a lawsuit (or non-judicial foreclosure sale) is likely imminent.  If you have more than one property, you definitely won’t know which property is being affected because you’re “not in the loop”.

REASON #3: You won’t have a legal “foot in the door!” 

One of the first ways foreclosure defense attorneys can defeat a case is to make the other side do its job properly. On many an occasion, a servicer has hired a process server to serve process and it was done improperly for whatever reason (tacking a note up on the door, which later blew away; false attestation, etc.) and thus, attacking service of process is the first line of defense in making the entire foreclosure process have to be refiled again.  Homeowners (as Borrowers) do not understand this principle because they’d rather “play ostrich” and stick their heads in the sand.  Remember, avoid conflict at all costs, unless it proves to be fatal.  In many states, refusing service when confronted can also mean service was accepted.  Judges don’t like it when the party being served deliberately says “NO” to process, because it’s their right to know what they’re being accused of doing (or not doing).  Judges have also been told to clear their dockets of issues like this, which is a precursor to a default judgment being issued against you.  It’s one thing NOT to be home when the process server calls, it’s quite another to refuse service when it could be something financially critical to your future well-being (and that of your family).

REASON #4: You have no idea how to strategize a defense to the service, let alone anything else! 

Many foreclosure defense attorneys understand that attacking improper service of process only frustrates the foreclosure process and doesn’t stop it altogether.  However, understand that if the other side is going to bring a claim against you, don’t you think they need to follow the letter of the law?  After all, this likely involves dispossessing you of your property and if they don’t do something as simple as to properly serve you with the paperwork, how do you know if everything else they’ve done is right too?

REASON #5: Time is of the essence! 

No matter what the outcome of service, time is working against you the longer you wait to accept service.  I’ve known at least one person that has deliberately made himself scarce when he knows a process server is attempting to serve him with papers.  He thinks that by avoiding service, he’s going to be able to delay his day in court.  Unfortunately, after a time of trying to serve a party at their residence, the process server will contact the attorney handling the opposition’s case and make mention of the facts (that you’re either avoiding or refusing service) at hand and the attorney may then request from the judge to allow for substituted service (meaning someone else close to you can be served in your stead), which makes you an open target for service at your place of employment or through a relative who lives nearest to you.

Once service has been completed, you have a timetable in place.  In judicial states (mortgage states) you have 20 to 30 days to respond to the complaint. If you don’t, a default judgment can be entered against you and the foreclosure will be commenced against the property without your knowledge and probably at a time most inconvenient to you (or your loved ones).  The last thing I’d want to see is someone being kicked to the curb.  See below (from the film 99 Homes): 

The setting of a timetable forces you to have to act to stop whatever is coming after you.  For the average homeowner, this means spending money you don’t have hiring an attorney to draft and file and answer to the Complaint.  The average homeowner should also understand that many attorneys aren’t real well versed in foreclosure defense and are likely to admit to things that they don’t understand.  Even worse, should a pro se homeowner proceed without at least some assistance of counsel, they are likely to screw themselves out of their home permanently, while putting their spouse or family at equal risk.

This is one of the reasons why we set up the FORECLOSURE DEFENSE WORKSHOP! 

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

Here is an opportunity to learn from one of the best foreclosure defense attorneys in Florida!  (see below)


Here … you have an opportunity to learn to fight back!

Download the Workshop application here: FDW ORLANDO REGISTRATION FORM

Yes, DK Consultants LLC is sponsoring this event.  This is the only event in 2017 and the ONLY event custom tailored to pro se litigants!

This means, you’re going to get educational information that is vital to saving your home … not just some sort of “delay game” strategy used by most Florida foreclosure defense attorneys!

ENROLL NOW!  SEATING IS LIMITED!

1 Comment

Filed under OP-ED, workshop