Tag Archives: risk pool

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

(OP-ED) — This overview of cases involving civil rights abuses are the author’s opinions based on his legal research and are for educational purposes only and should not constitute any rendering of legal advice or seek to draw any conclusions of law. This is the second discussion of three parts.

THE RULES OF THE GAME HAVE BEEN CHANGED

The issue of police brutality all boils down to the issue of perception of what law enforcement stands for … from both sides of the coin. When police make an arrest, they do so based on material facts surrounding probable cause. The behavior and demeanor of the accused and their right to justice is largely determined by the answers they give and the way they react to questioning by the arresting officers. We spend an inordinate amount of time watching television, where police officers are displayed as being the saviors against the wicked. Yet, in order for a criminal case to proceed, the evidence has to stack up against the accused. The evidence cannot be controverted or subverted with lies and deceit.

“We have repeatedly held, therefore, that an officer violates the Fourth Amendment by omission only if ‘it would have been clear to a reasonable officer that the omitted fact was material to the probable-cause determination. A warrant request violates the Fourth Amendment if the requesting officer knowingly, intentionally, or with reckless disregard for the truth, makes false statements in requesting the warrant and the false statements were necessary to the determination that a warrant should issue.’”

— Cited in Rainsberger v. Benner, 7th App. Cir. No. 17-2521 (Jan. 15, 2019)

And what does this have to do with civil rights, you ask yourself?

Because the Rainsberger case turned on the evidence, when it was discovered that the detective investigating the case (Benner) omitted exculpatory evidence and fabricated evidence wherein the probable cause affidavit was riddled with lies, undercut with the omissions that would have kept Rainsberger from being arrested in the first place … the outcome was that Detective Benner’s sovereign immunity privileges were stripped away by the Court because of his actions. That’s how this argument relates to foreclosures when brought into the civil realm.

The entire foreclosure scenario also deals with material fact, which is why the author brought the arguments within the Rainsberger case into this discussion. When material facts are distorted, manufactured or omitted, causing the homeowner to be unfairly prosecuted as to his right to be secure in his “persons and papers” as guaranteed under the Constitution, someone must be held accountable.

Since the 2008 financial collapse, numerous discoveries have been disclosed to the consuming public of deceitful acts committed by the banks and their servicers and third-party document mills. Unfortunately, with the changing of the rules in the way the “game is played”, moving cases to federal court have been reformed to the point that simply stating that “a person created a phony document used to steal my house” just doesn’t work anymore with the Supreme Court rulings in the Twombly and Iqbal cases. The author has included the following research for your education and understanding, as having proper knowledge of what to expect on the federal level, which should be put in the forefront in any anticipated civil rights actions that follow a foreclosure:

WITHOUT FORETHOUGHT: SUE! SUE! SUE!

It is problematic that over 90% of Americans do not understand their system of laws. In fact, criminals understand the legal system better than their enfranchised counterparts. When faced with legal action, the defendant homeowner either becomes despondent or angry. There is no in between.

The first objective is to lash out against every person or idea that contradicts one’s belief system, as flawed as it may be. The “entitled” believe they should stay in the house for free … that all of the foreclosure accusations are really the bank’s fault … yet the borrower obligated himself when he signed the mortgage documents, thus, creating a legal “can of worms” for himself. The finality of truth brings with it a reality check.

All semblance of logic goes right out the window in favor of emotion. This is one major reason this author created the Clouded Titles website and wrote the book by the same name back in 2009-2010 (officially released in December of 2010). In order to get in this game and play it well, emotion must be replaced with legal logic and right thinking.

If you’re like most Americans, you place blame on others for your own shortcomings. Shortcomings however do not replace mistakes. But what if you’ve been blindsided with facts you know not to be true? How do you cope then? Most Americans would let their emotions “out of check” upon realizing that the banks messed up their own paperwork and that now they (the homeowners) are paying for it!

CHAINS OF TITLE TELL STORIES … STORIES THAT DON’T LIE!

Without a doubt, the author’s previous PART I post disclosed that two independent examinations of the land records in Texas and Florida demonstrated the rampant use of false documents, one of which came to light in the U.S. Bank, N.A. v. Harpster case in Florida:

And this is not the only case either. In another Florida case, the bank’s attorneys came into court with not one but three different versions of what they claimed was the “new and improved” promissory note:

And on the witness stand, in another Florida case, Erica A. Johnson-Seck admitted to be a “robosigner”:

And the foregoing case found its way into a New York State foreclosure decision!

Sadly, a lot of homeowners run to bankruptcy court, thinking they can stave off a foreclosure. All this does is kill their credit scores to the tune of 450 points for up to 10 years! Even the federal Office of the Comptroller of the Currency calls bankruptcy “a stall tactic”. But what happens when the bank runs into bankruptcy court and lies about its “position” in the chain of title:

STEALING PEOPLES’ HOMES FOR FUN AND PROFIT!

The foregoing headline was spouted by a foreclosure defense attorney in Texas during a discussion of a workshop he attended that was held by foreclosure mill attorneys. One of the attendees, whose name repeatedly surfaced in the Williamson County, Texas Real Property Records Audit, Stephen C. Porter, appeared nervous because after the audit was released, he was exposed to the world as a “robosigning attorney”. This is where things get dicey for Mr. Porter, because this author looked up Mr. Porter’s Texas Deed of Trust and compared the signatures of the robosigned documents to those of Mr. Porter’s own mortgage note and they were unbelievably different from each other. In fact, it appeared as if the signatures may have been put there by his notary!

All of this of course, leads up to the discussion of the intent to defraud … the homeowner, the land records and the judge. This author believes that all foreclosure victims deserve their rights to due process and that any “officer” of the court, which an attorney is, should lose their “sovereign immunity” if they omit, lie or cheat their way through a foreclosure and steal someone’s homes using false documents which they themselves may have had a hand in!

It’s just that when homeowners win, they become like electricity, seeking the path of least resistance and crawling back into their comfort zone. They have no interest in follow-through to see that the party or parties creating the phony documents, which still continue to litter their chain of title like a hooker with AIDS, are brought to justice.

The time to attack these phony documents is BEFORE the foreclosure starts, not AFTER! In the Harpster case, the attorney at least had the gumption to research the assignment and talk to the bonding agent and obtain an affidavit which stated the notary did not have a valid commission at the time David J. Stern’s own secretary (Cheryl Samons) executed the assignment.

ALL IS NOT LOST IF YOU CHOOSE FOLLOW-THROUGH … WIN OR LOSE!

In a recent foreclosure case decided in a Mississippi Chancery Court, the judge, who is covered by the State’s risk pool as to her liability, gave the defendant homeowner 7-1/2 minutes to present his case and despite the best evidence presented in that amount of time by the homeowner:

  1. The judge decided he’d had enough time because (as she previously announced to the court) the judge had to leave to go to her daughter’s volleyball game;
  2. After making her ruling, the judge commented that it must be rough “looking through rose-colored glasses, having lived in a $274,000 home for free for over 5 years.” This clearly indicates bias;
  3. The other side’s attorney’s complaint was deficient, partly due to mismarked and improper exhibits that the judge refused to allow to be stricken from the record when objected to; and
  4. Given the judge’s social calendar, it’s obvious she cared more about not being in court versus simply making snide remarks when the evidence presented supported the case actually going to trial.

This is where the system of things HAS TO “kick into high gear”.

After seeing and hearing the results of this case … and here goes the “if it was me” diatribe, the author would:

  1. File a complaint with the Mississippi Judicial Review Board against the judge.
  2. File bar complaints against the three attorneys who “touched” the case, because they inadvertently and purposefully omitted evidence which would have pointed a finger directly at law firm involvement in the manufacture of an assignment used to give the plaintiff (LSF9) standing.
  3. File a Motion for Reconsideration in a timely manner (10 days), citing those things that the judge failed to take into account before making her decision (all administrative appeals and alternative moves must be taken before proceeding to filing a State Tort Claims Act action).
  4. The timetable for the due process violation (under the McDonough v. Smith case), according to the U.S. Supreme Court decision, begins to run when the final adjudication has taken place.

Could the homeowner have won his case (or in the alternative got his matter set for trial) had he retained counsel to defend his home? Maybe. That is a story for another day because it involves unwrapping the mindset of why homeowners (and the public at large) don’t trust attorneys.

There is some room for argument here that the damage would actually occur when the home is sold and the homeowner is evicted, but my non-lawyer take here is that the judge’s ruling set the clock in motion because it represents a final decision for which other actions (eviction) could follow.

AS TO THE JUSTICE SYSTEM, JUDGES SHOULD PAY FOR MAKING BAD DECISIONS RESULTING IN CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS!

Attorneys have errors and omissions policies. Robosigners are supposed to be bonded and have errors and omissions insurance naming them as a “covered party” in order to be a robosigner for MERS. Judges have bonds. Some judges have bonds with their own respective counties. Other state’s judges are paid by the state to be a judge, which means the State’s own “risk pool” (a big pile of money which pays out damages for provable civil rights violations) is ripe for the picking. Those who have the fortitude to file a 42 USC § 1983/1985 action may have the opportunity to realize justice when it’s used to get an attorney disbarred, get a document manufacturer prosecuted or get a judge tossed off the bench for aiding and abetting felony perjury.

The proof must come “in the pudding”. One cannot simply wave an alleged phony document around in front of the judge without implicating the parties that were involved in creating it. Justice is never served unless you can reach into the pudding, the likes of the Harpster case or better, and bring up the evidence required to show you were deprived of your due process rights by the Court and its officers. In the Harpster case, the judge who ruled in favor of the homeowner (Hon. Lynn Tepper, the author believes) was driven or “persuaded” to leave the bench by the political judicial hierarchy, because she was a fair judge and recognized fraud on the court for what it was. This judge did not simply take the bank’s word for anything, given the proof that was provided … stuff that this author has been sharing from an investigative standpoint for years.

This shows you how much “control” the banks have over the court systems in this country and why it’s likely a judge may be the culpable party in siding with lies by the attorney for the servicer. No one likes a liar. Liars deserve to go to jail if they participate in the thievery of stealing someone’s home using evidence that is manufactured or conveniently altered or omitted in what appears to be the commission of a crime.

And THAT is where the criminal justice system intertwines with the civil justice system. And if anything, police brutality should be the least of our concerns when “the system of things” is tainted with bias.

And this is exactly the reason WHY the author elected to do an online Foreclosure Defense 101 Workshop … because right thinking is called for here.

Stay tuned for PART III

1 Comment

Filed under I'm not posting any more stuff on here!

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

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

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

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

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

FALSE AND MISREPRESENTATIVE STATEMENTS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

HOMEOWNERS CAUGHT UNAWARES

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

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

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

The C & E on Steroids!

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

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

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

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

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

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

Leave a comment

Filed under OP-ED, Securitization Issues

GUTTING THE UNDERBELLY OF THE BEAST – PART 1

(OP-ED, first posted: August 25, 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. 

Everything these days revolves around insurance of some sort.  The credibility of some professions is backed up with insurance or bonding to guarantee against losses incurred by inadvertent or blatant illicit behaviors of those insured or bonded.  The system of things revolves around the dollar.  People have put their faith in the dollar, whether it has any backing or not.  As long as people (the body politic) can be fooled into a perception of believing that this so-called “legal tender” can still be used to pay debts “public or private”, the system will continue to flourish, whether “in the red” or “in the black”.

REALITY CHECK

Look how many times you purchase insurance in your life and for what purposes (CYA).

Virtually all 50 states require some sort of minimum liability auto insurance, through a policy that guarantees the insurance company will cover a loss if a claim is filed against the policy.  Many folks just get a liability policy if they’re driving a car that has no lien against it; however, an auto loan on a vehicle will require that you have full coverage.  Based on your driving record and your credit score, full coverage insurance can rape your monthly income, denying you of even basic needs just because you need to get to work and a means of insurable transportation to get you there.

Throughout the last decade of this dismal fight to keep Americans in health insurance, we’ve been forced to buy health insurance coverage through some sort of program connected with the Affordable Care Act.  Seniors over 65 are forced to buy Medicare.  That too comes with a price tag.  Part B is $134 a month, no matter WHO you go through to get insurance.  Any supplement insurance (which is highly recommended by agents these days), adds another $80-$100 a month on top of the $134 you pay every month just to avoid a financial catastrophe due to health issues.

You can’t get a mortgage loan without insuring the property with hazard insurance. When homeowners get into trouble, the first thing to be neglected is the hazard insurance payment.  Then the property taxes.  The lender (or its servicer) then has to cover any claimed losses by putting forced placed insurance on the property because the property owner failed to do so.  This process, which I call a “cheap date”, is used in part to prove that the servicer, acting on behalf of the lender, has some sort of interest to protect in the property, especially when it comes time to foreclose on said property.

If you own a business, most if not all responsible business owners carry a general liability insurance policy.  These policies generally start at $350 a year, which is no big deal. However, given any type of special insurance coverage, you’ll find that the more “risk averse” an insurer has to weigh in on a given situation, the more expensive the policy. For example, if your business deals in a product or service that comes with a higher risk than most of injuring the general public, this forces the premiums to go up.

Because many Americans are not well-funded and are deep in debt, the last type of insurance policy they encounter is a life insurance policy, to make sure that if something happens to them, their loved ones at least have some minimal nest egg to keep them going. This is where a majority of Americans put the least amount of dollars. Most of us are underinsured in this category.  I’ve heard a lot of folks say that “you’re making a bet with the insurance company that you’re going to live so long before they have to pay out”.  This is true, which is why I buy 10 to 15-year term insurance.  If I live past 80, I’m lucky.  Good luck getting insurance past 85, because virtually all insurance companies will deny coverage past that age because they know what the odds are of a quick payout.

By the time you’re 80 (if you live that long), you should have some sort of an “estate” to leave behind that’s worth something.  Most Americans however don’t even have $50,000 in savings they can fall back on if, God forbid, something goes wrong.  In fact, the number of consumer bankruptcies, especially those over age 65, is on the upswing. Student loans, mortgages and consumer debt are driving the bankruptcy filings, statistically well ahead of medical catastrophes.  However, I would proffer that “debt stress” would cater to certain medical issues at some point.

A NECESSARY EVIL

There’s insurance coverage out there for virtually every kind of behavior, including liability for actions taken against you that could be deemed illegal.  This is why we have “bonds” in place for judges, clerks, virtually all elected officials, notaries and credit repair people, to name a few.  Most counties in America are “self-insured”.  Most states have what is known as an “insurance risk pool” or a back-up fund of money to pay for damages that the state or its actors might cause against its citizens.

Law firms and real estate brokerages have what is known as “E & O” policies (or should) in order to exist.  “E & O” stands for Errors & Omissions (policies).  These types of policies generally pay out for legal services in case the insured comes under fire for erroneous or negligent behavior.  It’s a “knew or should have known better” scenario.  So the E & O primarily covers legal fees for representing the insured and/or paying out claims against the insured’s policy.

If there wasn’t an insurance policy covering something somewhere, our litigious society would drive this country into a financial meltdown sooner than later.  The only way that a meltdown would occur sooner than later is if the “perception” of the masses were to dynamically change to reflect an understanding that “insurance” supports the “underbelly of the beast.”   This is why I wrote the “Beyond End Game Strategies” supplement.  The concepts expressed here go beyond the traditional thoughts of most Americans. Insurance companies are “risk averse” … and their “end game” is to deny claims whenever possible due to exceptional or non-covered acts of the insured.  This is why insurance companies file more declaratory relief actions than most any other entity in America … to have a court determine whether they’re responsible to pay a claim on behalf of the insured.

Do you see where my thought processes are going?  There is a method to the madness and the “beast” is the system of things.

And … at some point … a meltdown in America is likely.

Stay tuned for Part 2.  It gets better! 

 

4 Comments

Filed under OP-ED