Monday, February 7, 2011
Wisconsin Appeals Court: Affidavits Not Based On "Personal Knowledge" Sink Lender's Attempt To Score Summary Judgment In Foreclosure Action
What does merit note is that, in reaching its ruling, it reversed the decision of Jefferson County Circuit Court Judge Jacqueline R. Erwin, the lower court judge who apparently didn't have a problem with these obviously flawed affidavits in deciding to allow the foreclosure to go forward. Unlike the vast majority of cases, the homeowner/couple here exercised their right to have an appellate court review, a right that most homeowners in foreclosure are either unaware of, or lack the wherewithal to pursue.
Sunday, February 6, 2011
This is very simple.
The LAWS dictate that the bank (or pretender lender) must offer PROOF of OWNERSHIP.
DEMAND a “pre-trial settlement conference.” Mediators are not allowed.
Make this an all or nothing wager. (Wall Street likes betting with other peoples’ money, right?)
Give the bank (or pretender lender) 60 DAYS from the initial hearing to produce the ORIGINAL NOTE (EVIDENCING THE ENDORSEMENTS IN BLANK or NO ENDORSEMENTS for TRUSTS?) – PLUS the ALLONGES, and ORIGINAL MORTGAGE.
Modern forensic analysis – to be paid by HAMP – would verify the credibility of the documents. Ink and paper can be time-dated with modern technology. Furthermore, hand writing analysis techniques and forensic computer technologies are also available and very refined today. Furthermore, The CEO’s (of the employees who “VERIFY” the accuracy of their own signing authority as evidenced in their own affidavits,) would be “sworn in” for perjury and other related potential criminal actions. This would also perhaps eliminate forgeries and criminally manufactured documents by the banks (or pretender lenders,) their foreclosure mill attorneys, and/or their default document preparation firms… To further GUARANTEE and ENSURE fairness, the Homeowner would choose the forensics firm who would operate under the penalty of perjury and fraud.
This simple wager would be established as follows:
1- The pretender lender would “sign off” at the initial “pre-trial settlement conference” on the mortgage and note, (FREE AND CLEAR with clean, marketable title, including the pretender lender’s assumption of all future liabilities for “John Does’ 1- 1000.”) The homeowner would then drop all future claims and counterclaims, and own their home free and clear. Further criminal prosecutions would be dropped for this individual case.
2- IF the pretender lender would NOT “sign off,” then the FORENSIC TESTING RESULTS – OR pretender lender’s NON-COMPLIANCE … in the following 60 days … would determine the FINAL OUTCOME of their claim.
3- At the end of 60 days at the NEXT summary hearing, (held exactly in 60 days,) IF the bank CAN LEGALLY PROVE THEIR OWNERSHIP by producing the legally necessary documents to the court, the HOMEOWNER has 30 days to peacefully surrender the premises without any further litigation.
4- At the end of 60 days at the NEXT summary hearing, (held exactly in 60 days,) IF the pretender lender COULD NOT PROVE THEIR OWNERSHIP to the court, the HOMEOWNER would receive the HOME – FREE AND CLEAR – (and FREE FROM ALL FUTURE LIABILITIES from “John Does’ 1 – 1000″ ….) PLUS, the homeowner would additionally receive FIVE MILLION DOLLARS CASH ($5,000,000.00) from the pretender lender now proved to be a criminal. Mandated criminal prosecutions and incarcerations would then follow for corporate parties found guilty of fraud, perjury, RICO Conspiracy, etc….
This MOST CERTAINLY, WITHOUT ANY DOUBT, would:
A) END “ABUSE OF PROCESS” and “FRAUD ON THE COURTS!”
B) END LOAN MODIFICATION SCAMS BY ALL ENTITIES!
C) END THE TYPICALLY UNFAIR AND DECEPTIVE PRACTICE OF QUESTIONABLE FORECLOSURES – and, so far, MOST (if not ALL) FORECLOSURES are questionable! (… Let’s not forget about the RAMPANT MORTGAGE FRAUD by the BANKERS in the lax and irresponsible origination and appraisals.)
D) END UNNECESSARY LITIGATION COSTS to homeowners, who cannot afford litigation in the first place. Only 5%(?) of homeowners are litigating and many of them are going bankrupt to merely protect their legal rights. There is currently very little JUSTICE for most homeowners.
JUSTICE is CLEARLY NOT AFFORDABLE!
Long and protracted litigation, through slick, legal maneuvering by attorneys (on both sides) – is demonstrably immoral and unethical.
E) END The strain of COURT COSTS to the TAXPAYERS and STATES!
F) END EMBARRASSMENT by many Judges, Bar Associations, and GOVERNMENT AGENCIES who have aided and abetted, at the very least, unethical behavior, or at the very worst, criminal behavior – regarding foreclosure fraud and mortgage fraud by the banks!
G) END The MISTRUST by citizens of law enforcement, regulatory agencies, and governments who have been wholly negligent of thier DUTIES to PROTECT and SERVE the citizens (who pay the “PUBLIC SERVANT’s” wages and benefits through taxes!)
H) END the WASTE and FRAUD perpetrated on America by worthless government and social policy programs!
I) END the CERTAIN DECLINE OF OUR ECONOMY. Millions of FREE and CLEAR HOMES would RE-START our economy with legitimate (and immediate) equity based lending!
J) END CLOUDED, UNMARKETABLE TITLES that will clog up the legal system for years to come!
K) VALIDATE and REAFFIRM OUR COUNTRY’S COMMITMENT TO FACT, LAW, JUSTICE, FAIRNESS and TRANSPARENCY!
L) UPHOLD THE SANCTITY of “our” U.S. and STATE CONSTITUTIONS!
.. And WHY COULD this NOT OCCUR?
You may call this:
THE GREAT AMERICAN “PUT UP OR SHUT UP” FORECLOSURE SOLUTION!
ISN’T THIS WHAT AMERICA STANDS FOR…FAIRNESS, JUSTICE, and EQUAL PROTECTION under the LAW?
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Hundreds of Judges across the country have put foreclosures into a waiting pattern demanding that the parties complete the HAMP modification procedure before they rule on the foreclosure or any defenses and counterclaims. The attorney for the pretender lender usually comes back with what Judge Redfield Baum, Federal Bankruptcy Judge in phoenix, called a haphazard array of answers usually amounting to a a report that the “investors turned down the modification.”
IN FACT, THE INVESTORS WERE NEVER CONTACTED NOR WERE THEIR REPRESENTATIVES OR ATTORNEYS, MANY OF WHOM ARE SUING THE INVESTMENT BANKERS FOR SELLING THEM BOGUS SECURITIES — THE EQUIVALENT OF WHAT WE HAVE CALLED HERE A “HOLOGRAPHIC IMAGE OF AN EMPTY PAPER BAG.”ACCORDING TO DIRECT INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM INVESTORS AND OFFICERS REPRESENTING DEUTSCH WHICH IS OFTEN USED AS THE NAME OF THE “TRUSTEE” FOR THE INVESTORS, THE ENTIRE PROCESS IS CONTAINED WITHIN THE SERVICER’S ORGANIZATION.
This means that the servicer is pretending to go through a modification procedure, after acknowledging that the servicer has no stake in the obligation, note or mortgage, and after putting the borrower through hoops and ladders, lost papers, resubmissions, and a variety of other stall tactics then reports back, often directly to the Court that the investors turned down the modification.
Our best information here is that no investor has EVER been contacted regarding a modification or settlement of ANY mortgage at any time. Based on our information no such attempt was ever made or intended and the lawyers who made those representations in Court knew it, inasmuch as it was always the intent of the servicer to create the illusion of a modification process rather than act as the go-between in an actual settlement process.
Further, based upon the information we have obtained directly from people involved in the securitization process, even Deutsch Bank, the most often used name as “Trustee” of asset backed securities pools, does not have a single Trustee from their Trust Department involved, nor are these deals considered to be within the scope of duties of their Trust department. To the contrary, senior officers of Deutsch confirm that they neither have the duty nor the power to approve modifications or settlements and that they have virtually no contact with investors. It appears that the ONLY thing that “Trustees” actually do is a collect a fee for pretending to be a fiduciary (Trustee) much like the loan originator with the homeowner was paid a fee to pretend to be a lender.
Courts are not pleased when they are the used as a vehicle for fraud. They are especially not pleased when large law firms and large financial institutions in whom the Court reposes a certain amount of trust, perpetrate such a fraud. Lawyers and pro se litigants are now asking for proof that the investors were presented with a modification and proof that the investors turned down the modification. The attorneys for the pretender lenders are stone-walling for the same reason that they stone-walled on the mortgage documentation — no such evidence exists because nothing was ever done.
This was probably the reason why Levitin called for elimination of the servicers from the modification or settlement process and installing a government sponsored agency to act as the go-between. The servicers and pretender lenders are fighting this proposal tooth and nail because if it went through, the entire lie would unravel. It would become obvious that many “trusts” never existed or do not now exist, many investors have already elected their remedies and the the pool was dissolved, and the ownership of obligation, note and mortgage has never been transferred.