Tag Archives: The Quiet Title War Manual

FLORIDA HOMEOWNERS SHOULD STAY OUT OF BK 7 COURTS IF THEY WANT TO FIGHT FORECLOSURES!

The author of this post is not giving legal advice, just reporting what’s out there.  You should consult a competent foreclosure defense attorney regarding such matters, as the contents in this post appear to reflect the court’s intolerance for homeowners who file bankruptcy to stop a foreclosure. 

OP-ED — 

Folks who are in trouble with their mortgages in Florida really need to strategize before taking the plunge into the abyss known as the Florida legal system, where state judges clearly have “agendas”, the Florida Legislature has “agendas” and the federal courts have “agendas” … all aimed at taking of property when you can’t make the payments on it.  It’s not often that the author of this post steers away from chain of title issues, but there appears to be widespread ignorance (or in the alternative, intolerance) on the part of the Sunshine State’s legal system, which makes things “not so shiny” anymore, given the recent spate of legislation and court actions.

STATE JUDGES

All one needs to do is examine court dockets to see how fast, over time, that Florida circuit judges have blindly assumed that the financial institutions coming before them actually own the promissory note they’re trying to enforce.  It would seem that judges simply rely on the blatant attack on the property owner as just because otherwise, why would this particular bank show up in court?   Because they can!  And they do!  And judges give them so much leeway that Florida homeowners are stymied for options.  This is why the State of Florida has so many zombie homes (despite what the politicians, economists and the media would have you believe) and shadow inventory that sits empty because of title issues.  In very few cases I’ve examined have I seen evidence within a transcript that allowed for a forensic examination of the note, to make sure it’s “original”, like the bank’s attorney says it is.  To show you that the inequity between state court systems is similar in nature, I’m consulting a case in New Jersey where the bank’s law firm sent a “cover lawyer” into court with what appeared to be a “faxed copy” of the note, claiming it to be the “original”.  I think most judges, even in light of the foreclosure defense attorney’s objections, could tell the difference, but nope … this judge said that the word of the law firm and the faxed copy of what it self-authenticated is good enough!  Can you believe that shit?

Another part of the equation is the existence of foreclosure defense lawyers who have seen fit to turn the foreclosure debacle into a cash cow by using delay tactics to keep property owners in their homes, despite the probable outcome that only about 1 in 25 cases brought into court makes it past the 810-day mark in a Florida foreclosure cycle.  Knowing that the odds are never “in their favor” (attributing the quotation to The Hunger Games), frustrated mortgagors then contemplate using bankruptcy court to dodge the “sale bullet”. However, things in Florida are about to change.

THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE

Effective July 1, 2017, Florida homeowners who run to the bankruptcy court and get their promissory note discharged are going to find themselves without other options to fight the foreclosure.  See House Bill 471 here if you don’t believe me: fl-hb-471  It’s only two pages long and I’m sure you can read (if you’re reading this)!

Simply put, any documentation that is filed in Bankruptcy Court which would indicate surrender of the property (commonly seen in Chapter 7 cases) makes it legally okay for the bank’s attorney to submit that document that was filed in the Bankruptcy Court under penalty of perjury to a Florida circuit judge to get a Final Judgment of Foreclosure.  I see this as a definite negative if you’re trying to fight a foreclosure.  But then again, most homeowners are like electricity.  They want to take the path of least resistance; and declaring bankruptcy is certainly a hell of a lot cheaper than fighting a foreclosure through Florida’s appellate system.

It appears that folks don’t understand the difference between an in rem and an in personam action.  Enforcement of a security instrument, which in Florida’s case is a mortgage, can only happen when the party claiming to have an interest in the property can prove ownership.  An attack on the property through the recorded security instrument is an in rem action (like quiet title actions).  This is why I wrote the book The Quiet Title War Manual (with the professional help of California attorney Al West).  The book explains the difference between the note and the mortgage.  Folks who don’t get it should get this book and read it, because when Al West and I taught quiet title workshops, we hammered these basic principles into the heads of the attendees.  In personam actions are actions involving debt, which in this case is the promissory note, NOT the mortgage!   How convenient it is that the Florida legislature has come up with this House Bill in the wake of the recent court conflicts within the federal system!

THE FLORIDA FEDERAL COURTS

Let’s look at the case of In re Hookerin-re-hooker   Once you get past the first three paragraphs, you’ll understand why the Florida legislature did what it did to help the banks fight continuous counterattacks in state court.  Again, how convenient, to avoid further confusion in the courts.  Let’s just legislate this away, shall we?

Now we come to the slam dunk that affects the way the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals (which covers Florida), has ruled that Chapter 7 debtors who file a bankruptcy action and put forth a statement of intention to surrender the real property cannot later contest a foreclosure in the state court. in-re-failla   If you read the first paragraph of this PUBLISHED OPINION, and then read the background on the case, it appears that the homeowners wanted to “have their cake and eat it too”.  The Failla case simply states: “Debtors who surrender property must get out of the creditor’s way.”   The Florida Legislature (I believe) made sure that a bill was passed that shut off the trough at the source of the feed (so to speak).

No more hogs at the trough.  There have been so many different points of view, it’s understandable that the Florida legislature would pass a bill that state courts could point a finger at and say, “SEE?”   So for those of you thinking that running into bankruptcy court (in any state for that matter) and declaring your intent to surrender the property (God forbid, why would you do that?) under penalty of perjury is so confusing to some when their state court cases get shut down.

ANOTHER WHAMMY! 

It has also become relatively apparent that any homeowner that has placed themselves in the foregoing position and continue to litigate their foreclosure in the state courts of Florida are likely to get sanctioned!   Vexatious litigants are likely to wind up in jail on contempt charges!  I say this because of what happened to foreclosure defense attorney Stuart Golant, 70,  in the Palm Beach County courtroom of Senior Judge Howard Harrison for simply making a motion!

Florida homeowners have had the deck stacked against them by the courts and the legislature in favor of the banks when it comes to promissory note enforcement.  Once a mortgage has been recorded in the land records where the subject property is situated, all it takes is a missed payment and the door to “foreclosure hell” opens to swallow the homeowners whole.   I can’t help but wonder what kind of counseling homeowners have received, given the phone calls and emails I get regarding strategizing an in personam case against them.

ONE MORE TIME …

In a judicial foreclosure state like Florida, a lender comes to court and waves the promissory note around and claims it has the right to enforce the terms of the note!  It should be required to prove that the note is genuine, forensically.  Have the actual paper tested.  Have the ink tested.  Check for pixelation by blowing the note up on a computer screen to examine evidence the note was photoshopped.  Object to the note being entered as the original.  I believe a majority of securitized notes are copies of what was downloaded into the MERS® System and later shredded, as I’ve covered in previous posts.

Once the lender gets the note in front of the court and gets it admitted into evidence and gets the court to agree that U.C.C. Article 3 (Negotiable Instruments) exists and that the alleged lender has the right to enforce the note, THEN the Lender gets to enforce the Security Instrument, the in rem part of the equation.  The security instrument (Mortgage) is then “ripe for the picking”.  Believe it or not, most homeowners think that the lender is foreclosing on the mortgage.  That couldn’t be further from the truth!  The Lender is foreclosing on the Note.  Proving it has the right to enforce the Note means the Lender gets the right to enforce the Security Instrument, not until!

Bankruptcy Courts are designed to handle in personam scenarios.  In personam relates to debt.  Promissory notes are evidence of debt!   Recorded mortgages are evidence of security interests, not debt!   If you’re going to use the bankruptcy court to alleviate your personal obligation to the note, and liquidate it in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy proceeding, be prepared to move out of your home!

Thinking twice about running into Chapter 7 bankruptcy court to stop the sale?   The “system” is ready for you!   (Hint: This is why we have Chapters 11 and 13!)  No matter, if you live in any state where you think the “deck is stacked” against you, plan your “end game” BEFORE you go into default, not after!

And this is why I don’t talk about in personam issues much.  Homeowners really should get a financial education before they sit down at the closing table.

Tune into kdwradio.com every Friday night at 6:00 p.m. EST for my radio show, City Spotlight: Special Edition!   Order any of the author’s books by visiting Clouded Titles!

For those of you waiting for the new FDCPA book, it’s almost ready!   Pre-order your copy today!  (FDCPA actions are for dealing with debt collectors!)

3 Comments

Filed under Financial Education, Op-Ed Piece

AND THE WINNER IS …

BREAKING NEWS — (with a little Op-Ed thrown in for good measure) … 

Those bumbling “talking heads” … 

The “talking heads” of all the major media networks were tripping all over themselves (during election night coverage) trying to “save face” for the “talking down” on one candidate in favor of another.

No matter.  If I was president, I would make sure that every media mouth was accounted for and access to the White House would be a major “hoop jumping” to get a media credential. Our U.S. media cannot be trusted with reporting the truth.  Our U.S. media likes to “invent” news (or hadn’t you noticed?) instead of really investigating and reporting the truth (and not as they see it), the whole truth and nothing but the truth.  The outcome of the election clearly left the media machine speechless, faltering on-mic for comment in an attempt to backpedal on their foolish pre-election hoopla. I shut the TV off at 2:15 a.m. and decided to wait for the early morning voting results to filter in.

Clearly however, I think both conservative and moderate American taxpayers have risen up and seriously spoken in favor of change away from the “status quo”.  That “status quo” includes Wall Street control of this country.  However, other changes that manifested themselves last night were overshadowed by a surprising upset by The Donald.  We now have a House and Senate that have a Republican majority under a Republican President.  As I said earlier, regarding the lesser of two evils, many of the facets of the Old School System are still in place, including the banking cartels and their influence in Congress.  The only thing that can make a difference is a presidential veto when the laws coming forward are clearly wrong.  Sadly, the “rank and file” are still in position to make pro-bank laws, in conflict with what the majority of the American people plainly stated in their popular vote. Until the American taxpayers actually make a change in the way they do business, the rank and file will continue to make their lives miserable.  Also keep in mind that the socialist vote (those who voted for Hillary) still went to the polls and voted for socialism.  They will still be a force to be reckoned with in the shallowed halls of Congress.

The voice of the people was heard in Osceola County, Florida! 

One thing is for sure however … Armando Ramirez was re-elected as the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Osceola County, Florida by well more than a slim margin, despite the rantings of the media about conducting a Forensic Examination of his official real property and court records.

050113_armandoramirez osceola-clerk-tally

In many ways, I feel mildly vindicated, as I authored that 758-page Report.  I too came under personal attack from the Orlando Smutinel and other rags and media outlets for something that happened to me over 20 years ago.  I believe that the people have faith in Mr. Ramirez and his poll numbers demonstrated this.  It also says a lot for the numbers that have read the Report and have come to understand the real truth of the matter regarding their mortgage foreclosures.  The bottom line here is that no matter whether you’re a Democrat or a Republican, the voters love you if you do the right thing!  I believe Armando Ramirez stood up to public and political pressure from the corrupt Florida elitists and the local media and told his constituents: I hear you loud and clear!  There is a problem with the land records!  You don’t win elections unless the voters agree with you and it appears that the Osceola County rank and file don’t want to hear the truth … but the people who are affected do!

Mr. Ramirez’s devoted and loving wife Millie also held onto her position on the Soil and Water Board, Seat 4 – Osceola.  Congratulations to them both as they will wholeheartedly serve their constituents for another four years.  And I have a feeling the backlash from the Osceola County Forensic Examination is not over yet. From the looks of the voting results in both of their races, it appears the silent majority included both Democrats and Republicans who believe in the Ramirez’s.  The politically-influenced (by the rank and file) voted against them to no avail.  As Mr. Ramirez stated in the campaign:  “Let Justice flow like a stream, and righteousness like a river that never goes dry.” Amos 5:24

Speaking of “Justice” in Osceola County, Florida, Russell Gibson (D) was elected as the new Sheriff, replacing the outgoing Robert Hansel, who is leaving office amidst the scandal surrounding the investigation of the results (or the lack thereof) contained in the Report; and in retaliation of having to conduct an investigation with deputies tasering an innocent stepson of one of the examiners of the Report.  Mr. Gibson would do well to watch out for those around him (currently in positions within the Sheriff’s Department). It is rumored that Gibson may keep the “rank and file” that investigated the Report in place; in fact, even promoting them.  This would be a mistake if this rumor is found to be true. These “people” demonstrated by their response to the Report, on Hansel’s behalf, that they know Osceola County, Florida may have illegally evicted thousands of homeowners based on fraudulent documents recorded in the Osceola County real property records and then relied upon in court by servicers and their attorneys, who are suspect of committing perjury on the courts, among other things.  The civil liability for these “errors” would be into the billions and they know it.  That’s why Sgt. Toby Hawkins told Al West, the attorney who was present in the February 9, 2015 meeting to “shut up” when Mr. West asked him about potential exposure (meaning civil liability).  Let’s face it folks … filing fraudulent documents is a felony in Florida and no one seems to want to enforce it, for now.

On the other side of the coin, Aramis Ayala ran unopposed and was elected as Florida’s 9th Circuit States Attorney.  Mr. Ramirez has already spoken to her about re-opening the investigation into the allegations made into the Report.  I’m sure Ms. Ayala will not make the same mistake that her predecessor, Jeff Ashton, did.  Oh wait, he was too busy playing around on AshleyMadison.com to investigate the contents of the Report, right?  I maintain that the felonies that were discovered and reported in the Forensic Examination can be found to be continually occurring to this date.  I can come up with a whole new set of allegations if I changed the dates on the search engines in the county land records from June 1, 2014 to June 1, 2016.  I’d find the same suspect fraudulent recordings that would carry with them all sort of felony charges.  It is about time Wall Street and all of the players below it that are assisting in the facilitation of servicer fraud get their just desserts. I still want my time in front of the 9th Circuit Grand Jury.

I’m sorry folks … but the Osceola County Sheriff’s Department is NOT going to get away with their feeble investigative denials.  As the incoming politician, Mr. Gibson should take note.  Any subsequent investigation will probably be taken out of his hands anyway, because the rank and file subordination catering to his office: (a.) think that securitization is like an annuity; and (b.) don’t believe in investigating crimes that could point a finger back at them.  Admitting responsibility for error is simply something that one in power does NOT do.  This is what has divided America and this is what the voters in the majority have soundly made heard by putting a CEO in the White House instead of a Wall Street lapdog. Congress needs to wake up and realize this.  Ms. Ayala’s office is going to have to take the “bull by the horns” and wrestle it to the ground on its own.

On paper, the winner may have been Donald J. Trump.  But the next four years, with the rank and file still in positions of power in Congress, will still be “hell”, only now it will be “hell on steroids” with Republicans holding a majority in both the House and Senate.

The only saving grace is those who are exiting the current administration that were self-serving (or serving a socialist political agenda) … here’s a message from The Donald: YOU’RE FIRED!

Dave Krieger is the author of the books Clouded Titles, The Credit Restoration Primer and The Quiet Title War Manual, all available at CloudedTitles.com

6 Comments

Filed under Breaking News, Op-Ed Piece

TITLE IS TITLE, NOTE IS NOTE … BANKS CAN’T EVEN GET IT RIGHT!

Op-Ed!

I do not know what the law schools are teaching regarding real property law, but here is an atypical case where one alleged lender used a quiet title action to prove a mortgage loan existed on a piece of property and a Maine Superior Court Judge chimed in … loud and clear … “what the hell were you people thinking?”

In the case of U.S. Bank, N.A., as Trustee for LSF8 Master Participation Trust v. Decision One Mortgage Company, LLC, (Superior Court, CV-15-65)(July 26, 2016), the Plaintiff (U.S. Bank) claimed it owned a note and mortgage, claiming the Defendant (Decision One), the originating lender on the note, was defunct and could not collect on the note.

The problem I have is, U.S. Bank didn’t get it right in Ibanez and they sure didn’t get it right here.  I mean, seriously, folks, using a quiet title action to prove up a note?  Seriously?  Someone either fell asleep in property law class or someone just is plain stupid in their legal analysis of this subject matter.

I have been trying to drum it into people’s heads that a quiet title action (when coupled with a request for declaratory relief) is used to determine who has superior title to any given piece of property … NOT to determine who owns the note with the right to enforce the terms of a mortgage.

Simply put … the court agreed with my teachings … not U. S. Bank’s attorneys!  It is sad that my consulting is now limited to attorneys litigating quiet title and will not be available (unless you read The Quiet Title War Manual) to the general public.

A quiet title action, as Al West and I so succinctly put it in the foregoing 512-page educational manual, is an action whereby you put forth a claim that you have superior title and request that the court determine the rights and interests of the parties as to “title”.  A note is an obligation created at the closing table and is not recorded in the public records, whereas “title” is recorded, by virtue of a deed.  The deed is your proof of ownership.

MERS, Securitization and Quiet Title

I don’t see MERS anywhere on anyone’s “deeds”, yet MERS thinks they have “legal title” to everything contained within a MERS-originated mortgage.  This is one of the reasons I keep telling people to “say NO! to MERS mortgages”.  Once you let this parasite in, you’ve just exacted hell upon yourself in unwanted legal fees, because the intent of the founders of MERS (Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the banks) was to securitize your mortgage note (turn it into a security on Wall Street) and pander it to every ignorant investor who thinks that investing in securities is a “smart thing” to do.  I see nothing wrong with getting up and walking out of a closing where you are presented with MERS-related paperwork.  After all, by the time you get to the closing table, your note has probably already been sold at least nine times, WITHOUT YOUR SIGNATURE ON IT!  This is the big lie folks!

Say NO! to MERS!

If you think that your signature on a mortgage note is the start of the sale of the terms and conditions put forth under Paragraph 19 or 20 (depending on which long-form mortgage document you are signing), think again.  It doesn’t say WHEN the Lender may sell your note (or a partial interest thereof), as long as the Lender has your Form 1003 Loan Application.  When your loan application is submitted, it gets pandered all over Wall Street, along with your personal identifying information, in addition to being inputted into the MERS® System electronic database.  You make it all literally “legal” when you sign the mortgage and note.  But what if you didn’t?

What if you “woke up” and realized the MERS-originated Mortgage was a scam to steal your personal identifying information (your payment history, your credit scores and your personal information, e.g. social security number, date of birth … all the things these would-be thieves use to steal your identity) and you said NO! and got up and walked out of a closing?  What could the Lender do?

The REMIC trust rules allow for “qualified loans” to be substituted up to 90 days AFTER the trust closes, so that would be construed to mean that some other dumb sucker’s loan (who didn’t wake up like you did) would be put into the place occupied by your loan.  The REMIC itself contains a list of loan numbers (yet to be assigned, until you sign the paperwork) and these loan numbers mean nothing without “legal backing” behind them.

If MERS is shown on your paperwork (solely as a nominee), this failure of a beta business model will attempt to outsource and outspend you and cause you serious health problems (because of what it does to your chain of title) … and by the time all this happens, your title is too late to fix because no one knows who owns what … except that the title to the property is in YOUR NAME!   That is the for sure thing.

In the foregoing case, neither U.S. Bank nor Decision One was “on title”.  The homeowner’s name was on title. I didn’t see him filing the quiet title action, probably because of ignorance.  This is the fallacy being played upon the American public by the banks and it appears the banks themselves are drinking their own kool-aid.

9 Comments

Filed under Op-Ed Piece, Quiet Title Education

ROBINSON CASE GOES BEFORE THE U.S. 9TH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS!

BREAKING NEWS

The case of MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. v. Daniel and Darla Robinson is headed for the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Oral arguments are set to be heard on Thursday, December 8, 2016 in the Pasadena, California branch and California Attorney Al West, contributor to THE QUIET TITLE WAR MANUAL is now admitted to practice before the U.S. 9th Circuit and is slated to present the oral argument, at the insistence of the Robinsons.

If you are within traveling distance of the Pasadena, California branch, Al West has requested that you “pack the courtroom” for this event! 

There are several key issues here that are of national importance, which is what some judges are saying makes this case a national landmark case:

  1. where a federal judge has reversed a state judge’s ruling on a quiet title action, when the parties who claim an interest had a state court remedy to open up the judgment and challenge it and failed to exercise that right;
  2. where MERS and MERSCORP came in and accused the judge of being an “actor” in depriving MERS and MERSCORP of their civil rights; and
  3. where MERS and MERSCORP claimed they were entitled to notice, yet there is nothing in the Robinson’s Deed of Trust that entitles MERS to: (a.) notice rights; and (b.) assign any interest to anyone.

OP-ED —

It is unprecedented that a federal judge would reverse himself and undo a quiet title action.  Needless to say, word has it that when the state judge found out that he was accused of being an “actor” because he “colluded” and “conspired” with Al West and the Robinsons to obtain a quiet title judgment, he was pissed!  Frankly, I don’t blame him.  Every other state judge should be worried as well … if the 9th Circuit deems that the state judge conspired with Al West and the Robinsons and allows this to stand, then every state judge in America can be overturned for any ruling by a federal court, just because some “shell” entity (or anyone for that matter) can come in and tell the court that their civil rights were violated!

That would also mean that anyone doing a quiet title action might as well forget it, because MERS and MERSCORP do not care about your property rights or your contractual obligation to defend title.  They do not care if your chain of title has been trashed or compromised, impairing its vendibility.  We’ve heard state judges even say, “The only parties that get to quiet title are the banks!”  So you know that the entire system is slanted in their favor because: (a.) judges are drawing pensions which are vested in these RMBS REMICs; and (b.) judges in this country are “bought and paid for” and there are very few judges that are standing up for the homeowner.

The Robinson case could end up in front of the United States Supreme Court because the circuits are split on what MERS is and isn’t allowed to do within the parameters of a contract.  The states themselves are split on what MERS is and isn’t allowed to do within the parameters of a contract.  Here’s some examples:

On February 10, 2011, in the case In re Ferrell Agard, New York Bankruptcy Court Judge Robert Grossman eviscerated MERS’s agency relationship in a scathing 37-page opinion, in response to affidavits filed by then MERSCORP Secretary William Hultman, who intervened in the case, trying to make an argument bolstering MERS’s authority to be an nominee and thus, an assignor/assignee of mortgages.  Negating that argument, Grossman wrote:

“The Court recognizes that an adverse ruling regarding MERS’s authority to assign mortgages or act on behalf of its member/lenders could have a significant impact on MERS and upon the lenders which do business with MERS throughout the United States. However, the Court must resolve the instant matter by applying the laws as they exist today. It is up to the legislative branch, if it chooses, to amend the current statutes to confer upon MERS the requisite authority to assign mortgages under its current business practices. MERS and its partners made the decision to create and operate under a business model that was designed in large part to avoid the requirements of the traditional mortgage recording process. This Court does not accept the argument that because MERS may be involved with 50% of all residential mortgages in the country, that is reason enough for this Court to turn a blind eye to the fact that this process does not comply with the law.”

One month later (March 10, 2011), the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Appellate Division, Second Judicial Department (in the case of Bank of New York v. Silverberg, Case No. 2010-00131, Index No. 17464-08) issued an opinion and order that went solidly against MERS, to wit:

“This matter involves the enforcement of the rules that govern real property and whether such rules should be bent to accommodate a system that has taken on a life of its own. The issue presented on this appeal is whether a party has standing to commence a foreclosure action when that party’s assignor—in this case, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (hereinafter MERS)—was listed in the underlying mortgage instruments as a nominee and mortgagee for the purpose of recording, but was never the actual holder or assignee of the underlying notes. We answer this question in the negative.”

That decision put New York State on the map against MERS in the appellate court level as well as in at least one bankruptcy court.  It should come as no surprise that Wells Fargo would later find itself in trouble with another bankruptcy court justice (Hon. Robert D. Drain) for using MERS in robosigning documents in favor of Wells Fargo, in an attempt to create fraudulent standing, based on a 150-page “foreclosure attorney manual”, instructing attorneys to simply contact Wells’s document manufacturing plant in Minnesota … and the folks there would just “make up an assignment out of thin air”, just for the purpose of proving up a proof of claim in bankruptcy court.  That case, In re Carrsow-Franklin, did not fair well for Wells Fargo when the debtor’s attorney, Linda Tirelli, exposed the attorney manual to the court.

 In Washington State, the decision in Kristin Bain v. Metropolitan Mortgage Group of August 16, 2012 rendered a ruling from that state’s Supreme Court (Case No. 86206-1, consolidated with 86207-9) that MERS was NOT a valid beneficiary under the Washington Deed of Trust Act.

Shortly after the Bain decision, the Oregon Supreme Court decided the same thing in Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC and Brandrup v. ReconTrust Company et al … and ruled MERS was not a valid beneficiary under the Oregon Deed of Trust Act. Shortly after the two Oregon decisions, the Montana Supreme Court decided that MERS did not have the authority (as a nominee) to appoint a Substitute Trustee in the Pilgeram v. Greenpoint Mortgage Funding, Inc. case.  These decisions were pointed out in the next paragraph.

On June 12, 2014, in a class-action lawsuit styled In re: Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (No. 11-17615), the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a multi-district litigation panel set up in Arizona to look into the use of MERS in suspect fraudulent document manufacturing in a case in Arizona, reversing Count 1 of a federal appellate court ruling, wherein the Court opined (in 31 pages), the conflicts throughout the entire U.S. court system:

“There has been a wave of litigation in state and federal courts challenging various aspects of the MERS System. Almost all of the relevant law is state rather than federal. The results under state law have been inconsistent. See Weber, supra, at 246–56 (cataloguing the “schizophrenic position of state courts” on issues relating to the MERS System). Some state supreme courts have upheld the MERS System on issues ranging from foreclosure authority to recording requirements. See, e.g., Renshaw v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 315 P.3d 844, 846–47 (Idaho 2013) (holding that MERS may be a beneficiary as nominee for the lender, that assignments of the deed of trust between MERS members need not be recorded, that MERS was not liable to the borrower in negligence, and that the Idaho Consumer Protection Act did not provide a cause of action to the borrower); Jackson v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 770 N.W.2d 487, 501 (Minn. 2009) (holding that Minnesota law does not require recording of assignments of promissory notes among MERS members); Edelstein v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon, 286 P.3d 249, 252 (Nev. 2012) (stating that, although a split note and deed are not enforceable, under Nevada law “any split is cured when the promissory note and the deed of trust are reunified”); Bucci v. Lehman Bros. Bank, FSB, 68 A.3d 1069, 1081, 1083–89 (R.I. 2013) (holding that MERS had the contractual authority to invoke the power of sale and the right to foreclose and that Rhode Island law did not preclude foreclosure where the noteholder and the mortgagee were not the same entity).

Other state supreme courts have reached essentially opposite conclusions. See, e.g., Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v. Sw. Homes of Ark., 301 S.W.3d 1, 4 (Ark. 2009) (holding that, because MERS receives no payments on the debt, it is not the beneficiary, even though it is so designated in the deed of trust); Landmark Nat’l Bank v. Kesler, 216 P.3d 158, 166–67 (Kan. 2009) (“[I]n the event that a mortgage loan somehow separates interests of the note and the deed of trust, with the deed of trust lying with some independent entity, the mortgage may become unenforceable.”); Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc. v. Saunders, 2 A.3d 289, 297 (Me. 2010) (holding that MERS lacked standing to foreclose as the lender’s nominee); CPT Asset Backed Certificates, Series 2004-EC1 v. Cin Kham, 278 P.3d 586, 592–93 (Okla. 2012) (holding that the putative noteholder lacked standing to foreclose because MERS lacked authority to assign the note, though it arguably had authority to assign the mortgage); Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co., N.A., 303 P.3d 301, 304–05 (Or. 2013) (en banc) (holding that MERS was not the “beneficiary” of a deed of trust under the Oregon Trust Deed Act absent conveyance to MERS of the beneficial right to repayment, and that MERS could not hold or transfer legal title to the deed as the lender’s nominee); Bain v. Metro. Mortg. Grp., Inc., 285 P.3d 34 (Wash. 2012) (en banc) (holding that “MERS is an ineligible ‘“beneficiary” within the terms of the Washington Deed of Trust Act’ if it never held the promissory note or other debt instrument secured by the deed of trust,” and that “characterizing MERS as the beneficiary has the capacity to deceive” and may give rise to an action under the Consumer Protection Act); see also MERSCORP, Inc. v. Romaine, 861 N.E.2d 81, 88–89 (N.Y. 2006) (Kaye, C.J., dissenting in part) (identifying concerns with the MERS system and “at least a disparity between the relevant statute . . . and the burgeoning modern-day electronic mortgage industry”).

Federal courts, applying state law, have reached similarly disparate results. Compare, e.g., Montgomery Cnty., Pa. v. MERSCORP, Inc., 904 F. Supp. 2d 436, 441 (E.D. Pa. 2012) (applying Pennsylvania law and holding that the County’s allegations that MERS violated recording statutes by failing to record assignments stated a claim for relief), In re Thomas, 447 B.R. 402, 412 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2011) (applying Massachusetts law and holding that “[w]hile the assignment purports to assign both the mortgage and the note, MERS . . . was never the holder of the note, and therefore lacked the right to assign it. . . . MERS is never the owner of the obligation secured by the mortgage for which it is the mortgagee of record”), and In re Wilhelm, 407 B.R. 392, 404 (Bankr. D. Idaho 2009) (applying Idaho law and holding that MERS is not authorized “either expressly or by implication” to transfer notes as the “nominal beneficiary” of the lender), with Town of Johnston v. MERSCORP, Inc., 950 F. Supp. 2d 379, 384 (D.R.I. 2013) (holding Rhode Island law does not require recording of assignments among MERS members); DeFranceschi v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 837 F. Supp. 2d 616, 623 (N.D. Tex. 2011) (granting summary judgment to defendants on plaintiffs’ claims that assignments by MERS were invalid and rendered foreclosure defective), and Moore v. McCalla Raymer, LLC, 916 F. Supp. 2d 1332, 1344–45 (N.D. Ga. 2013) (applying Georgia law and holding that, even assuming the plaintiff had standing to challenge the foreclosure on the theory that MERS assignments were invalid, that theory did not provide a basis for a wrongful foreclosure claim).”

The foregoing was used simply to illustrate the disparity in case law involving MERS, which is further reasoned as a necessity for the Robinson case to go to the nation’s highest court. The foregoing is also an understanding of what the 9th Circuit is thinking (and what MERS and its parent are up against) regarding said disparities.

A month after the 9th U.S. Circuit ruling, on July of 2014, in the Bank of America, N.A. v. Scott A. Greenleaf case, the Maine Supreme Court decided that MERS was a “mortgagee of record” and thus, was only allowed to assign that right, and no other, which brought foreclosures to a screeching halt (by roughly 65% according to attorney Tom Cox, who argued for Greenleaf).

In December of 2015, the Tennessee Supreme Court went further than any other Supreme Court in the U.S. in the case of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. v. Carlton J. Ditto, a pro se litigant who won rulings from the district, appellate and the Supremes … one of the only pro se litigants going up against MERS that I can find to accomplish such a feat.  In that ruling, which I have discussed extensively on this blog, MERS has no authority to do anything according to the Court’s opinion.

Many other states have sported decisions in favor of MERS because attorneys representing homeowners had no idea what they were getting themselves into, further allowing MERS to get its arguments admitted into the record without objection because these same attorneys had no concept of MERS’s business model.  Had these attorneys read Robert Janes’ “SHELL-GAME MERS, Contrived Confusion” BEFORE going into court, the outcomes may have been different!

My take on this … and I will be in court for the hearings on December 8th … is that no matter what this circuit decides, one or the other of these parties are going to take this up to “the big top”!  Once the U.S. Supreme Court decides whether our nation’s court systems should support a private entity, which I conclude were created to hide the misdeeds and snafus of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the sooner we can begin to identify and oust the legislators who put laws into place giving MERS credence anywhere in America.

The entire court system in America is at risk because of Robinson.  This author has is on good authority that the entire court system in the U.S. is watching this case with more than just simple interest.  The contract you sign at the closing table has everything to do with the arguments in this case, because a number of cases have been decided against MERS based on what the contract “didn’t say”.  I would opine MERS’s arguments are indeed “schizophrenic”, as the Tennessee Supremes ruled in Ditto.  We shall see.

 

12 Comments

Filed under Breaking News, Op-Ed Piece

THE LAST QUIET TITLE WORKSHOP OF 2016!

BREAKING NEWS (from the poster)! 

For those of you who are planning to attend the Honolulu, Hawaii Quiet Title Workshop, please be advised of the following:

  1. This will be the last workshop of 2016 that Al West and I are doing together.  Either be there or miss out.
  2. This will be the last quiet title workshop that Al West and I are offering to the general public, due to lack of interest.  So, this is your last opportunity to have a powerful think tank at your disposal.  You can get the information on the workshop by clicking on the following links:
  3. QT WORKSHOP_HONOLULU_REGISTRATION FORM  (Please follow the instructions on the form!)
  4. QUIET TITLE WORKSHOP FLYER_HONOLULU  (I would recommend using discount hotel services to book your room and airfare, as our group discounts have expired!)
  5. I have decided to go a different direction involving my consulting work, which means I will be handling more attorney-based cases involving investors and homeowners who have retained counsel that is willing to accept consulting services; otherwise, I will only take cases on that basis.
  6. I am not a lawyer referral service; however, I can assist you in vetting attorneys, once you find them.  This will be done on a conference call basis for a flat fee of $75.00, payable by credit card in advance of the conference call.
  7. You can still purchase The Quiet Title War Manual, Clouded Titles and The Credit Restoration Primer from the Clouded Titles website.
  8. The online COTA Workshop is still in development and probably will not be ready until 2017.  If I become aware of any COTA Workshops being hosted by other entities in the future, I will inquire as to whether the folks who monitor this blog will be allowed to attend, at which point I will post the information accordingly.
  9. Any referrals to other consulting services outside of my immediate concern are the responsibility of those parties wishing to contact and contract with those services.  I no longer am working with outside parties who may or may not have further useful information to help you with your case.
  10. The rates on my COTAs now start at $1295.00 and go up from there.  I have a “full plate” and anticipate having a full plate for the next 3 years.  Despite what the banks, MERS and law enforcement have attempted to do in smearing me all over the media, with the help of a few self-proclaimed “investigators” who run  websites that state I ripped off the U. S. Government, I am still economically intact and am not going anywhere.  The Orlando Sentinel’s Henry Curtis got his story all wrong and was probably paid off by someone to write the article against the Osceola County Clerk in the first place, which makes his brand of journalism shoddy and unreliable at best, about as unreliable as you can get.  Any news outlet that would hire him would be a huge mistake and a disservice to the public at large. The current Osceola County Sheriff STILL isn’t running for re-election and the 9th Circuit State’s Attorney who refused to investigate the Forensic Examination commissioned by the Clerk was defeated in the Democratic primary last August.  The voters have awakened!

That being said … 

  1. I will still continue to post updated information on this site.  Once the online workshops are up, please note they are general in nature and are only there to help you formulate your research in conducting chain of title issues and will not offer legal advice, attorney referrals or any other subject matter information that is not relevant to chain of title.
  2. I will still continue to be the “foe” of MERS, MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. and the banks.  I am sick and tired of them and wish they were all in prison.  Unfortunately, the United States Government is in bed with the banks; yet the average, uninformed consumer still chooses to participate in impulse buying of homes they are NOT entitled to and cannot afford; thus, the same nonsense that plagued us in the 90’s and the millennia will continue to plague us for at least the next decade as the banks continue to water down the Dodd-Frank Act through their lobbyists.
  3. If you wish for Al West and I to come to your city to conduct a Quiet Title Workshop, there are firm parameters you will have to follow. You will have to guarantee 30 paid attendance for the event and the rate will be higher than what we normally charge to do a workshop and you will have to pay our travel to and from the event, plus meeting room and hotel rooms. No exceptions.
  4. I am still working on the FDCPA book.  This book is going to be a powerful think piece, in addition to all of the case citations, strategies and legal attack plans placed within this work, based on previous history of those who have been successful in such actions.  This has become the most formidable attack plan against the servicers and their law firms who lie in court about who they truly represent.  Yes folks, we are knee deep in servicer fraud.  In my estimation, the named plaintiff in a foreclosure suit does not know they’re the named plaintiff!
  5. The federal court systems (as well as the state court systems) are corrupt as hell!   Sure, there are a few judges out there that get it academically, but until you do your research and bring an adequate “game plan” to the table, all of the bad case law will continue to screw things up in the legal system because people may be mad, but they’re still unprepared financially and in all aspects of their education involving legal matters.
  6. Most attorneys have figured out how to scam homeowners for monthly payments and give them nothing in return.  I am still getting email from homeowners who are concerned that they may have picked the wrong attorney to represent them.  I am not an attorney referral service, but I have a few that I work with that I have found to be reliable.  If you have started your litigation pro se however, they may choose not to work with you.
  7. Please do not contact me about TILA and RESPA issues. That is not my focus.  There is narrow case law in these areas and you still aren’t going to get and free house, despite what anyone tells you.  I have been contacted by United States Treasury Agents regarding certain claims made by firms who tell consumers that all they have to do is file a rescission and they get a free house.  Unlike what happened to me 20 years ago, it is not me that is the target here.
  8. I will continue to do county land record audits.  If you know of someone who needs (or has indicated) they want one done, please let me know. If you’re in California, Al West will show the County Recorder how they can get a county land record audit done without the charges coming out of their budgets.
  9. Al West and I are still working on projects together.  Al West and I will be at the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals hearings on MERSCORP v. Robinson.  Yes, I authored quite a bit of the reply brief and I am very well aware (as MERS is) of the fact that MERS sent a mole in to bug our Las Vegas Quiet Title Workshop. I found out about that from information supplied to me that originated through a federal judge in Maryland. It would appear to indicate to me that the folks at MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. (and the U.S. government) understand that I am “not going away any time soon” … and if I do, it will be by their hand and their doing and not mine!  We are still coordinating efforts regarding certain AWL and ABC mortgage loans. We are also handling IRS Whistleblower cases!
  10. In certain matters, I may also be testifying in court. This still does NOT make me an expert witness. Please do not contact me to testify at your hearing or at trial.  If subpoenaed without my knowledge or consent, consider me a hostile witness ab initio.  I still want my day in front of the grand jury, be it state or federal.  I have a lot to tell them and show them.

Beware of whack jobs that continue to dwell on what happened to me 20 years ago.  As attorney Lynn Szymoniak eloquently put it … “it doesn’t matter what he did 20 years ago, what matters is what he’s doing now!”  If Ms. Szymoniak didn’t believe in what I was doing, she would NOT have shown up to my COTA Workshop to lecture to the class.  Please support The Housing Justice Foundation.

Finally, when I’m done with the FDCPA book, I am going to pick up where I left off and finish the “other book” I have been working on … a book which explains in detail what happened to me 20 years ago, the American legal system, American politics in general, and why Americans are becoming polarized in certain aspects of society.  The U. S. Government will definitely NOT like what is in this “other book” (although it’s not as dicey as “Snowden”).  If you get a chance to see that movie … this man should be exonerated and not indicted.  He just sent a warning shot to all of you out there that think you’re “secure” when you’re anything but.

No, I’m not a doom-and-gloomer.  Like many of you out there who are evaluating your future plans and strategies, that is a wise move in my book. Remember, the U. S. government is paranoid as a whole and government employees believe everything Uncle Sam tells them.  I have found trusts to be quite handy these days.

 

5 Comments

Filed under Breaking News, Chain of Title Education, Financial Education, Quiet Title Education