sourdoughnative

Members
  • Content Count

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

10 Good

About sourdoughnative

  • Rank
    CIC Member
  • Birthday 06/09/1959

Profile Fields

  • Location
    Iowa
  1. Being sued by the infamous CACH. Hearing is in 3 days and in the mail I receive notice from the iowa courts system that this case has been converted into an "electronic filing only" status. Not only that at the actual hearing a Clerk of Court will be presiding. Received this on Friday, the hearing is Monday. Seriously.....WTF? And yes I planned on using Lack of Standing and hearsay as an effective defense.
  2. Actually, yes we have heard. BONY-Mellon's lawyers did file a Foreclosure Decree and Canceled the Note and Mortgage. Which of course we did freak out about. Our liaison at BOA though explained that they do this in the event we don't complete our part of the trial in order to finalize the DOJ modification. They are just making sure they have all their "ducks in a row". Happy to say we are almost done with our last trial payment and I look forward to finalizing this mod. I will post that info on a new thread. ++
  3. DISMISSED PER COURT That says it all....thanks again everyone for your support, couldn't have done it without you. ::allhail::
  4. Still haven't seen or heard any ruling yet.
  5. Well Dang, had my little encounter today with the Magistrate and of course Litow and friends didn't show. I sensed things weren't going to go well when he asked if had an attorney present. (All the papers filed say Pro Se). He then proceeded to ask if I had any witnesses or evidence to present.......... I basically told him I felt they Lacked Standing to Sue based upon the fact that a Valid, Authenticated Bill of Assignment or sale was presented or proven. He shuffled through all the paperwork they sent him (not to Me) numerous times and basically said if you can present Legalese or case law to dispute this, go ahead. Otherwise he said he has to study case law in order to make a ruling. He felt that the documents they presented HIM validified the debt. I kept stating I didn't think they constituted Authenticated Proof. Came down to him saying there had been a recent ruling regarding cases such as these (6 months ago he said) and he would have to study that and case law and then would mail me the ruling. Criminy,,. I left feeling like the wind just got momentously sucked out of my sails. It's like he was punishing me for trying to represent myself.
  6. "Critical Information: How to Find Your Home’s Pooling And Servicing Agreement February 28th, 2011 | Author: Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. IbanezThe pooling and servicing agreement (PSA) is a contract that should govern the terms under which trillions of dollars worth of equity in the land of the United States of America was flung around the world. These contracts should govern how disputes over ownership and interest in the land that was the United States of America should be resolved. Pretty simple stuff, right? I mean if I’m a millionaire big shot New York Lawyer working for big shot billionaire Wall Street Investors and banks, then I’d do my job as a lawyer to make sure the contract was right and that all the i’s were dotted and the t’s were crossed right? But that’s not at all what’s happened. In our scraggly street level offices, far below the big fancy marble encased towers of American law and finance, simple dirt lawyers defending homeowners started actually reading these contracts. We ask lots of questions about just what all those fancy words in their big shot contracts mean. Invariably, the big shot lawyers and the foreclosure mills tell us, “Don’t you worry about all them words you scraggly, simple dirt lawyer. Those words aren’t important to you.” But increasingly judges recognize that the words really do mean something. Take note of the following statements from the recent Ibanez Ruling: I concur fully in the opinion of the court, and write separately only to underscore that what is surprising about these cases is not the statement of principles articulated by the court regarding title law and the law of foreclosure in Massachusetts, but rather the utter carelessness with which the plaintiff banks documented the titles to their assets. The type of sophisticated transactions leading up to theaccumulation of the notes and mortgages in question in thesecases and their securitization, and, ultimately the sale of mortgaged-backed securities, are not barred nor even burdenedby the requirements of Massachusetts law. The plaintiff banks,who brought these cases to clear the titles that they acquired attheir own foreclosure sales, have simply failed to prove that theunderlying assignments of the mortgages that they allege (and would have) entitled them to foreclose ever existed in any legallycognizable form before they exercised the power of sale thataccompanies those assignments. The Ibanez decision underscores the fact that it is important for all of us to know and understand how the pooling and servicing agreements directly impact what is occurring in the courtroom. And for assistance with understanding the PSA and how to find it, more commentary from Michael Olenick at Legalprise: After that it’s the the servicers/trustee/document custodian scheme we’re all familiar with. OK .. with that too-strange-to-make-up explanation means let’s dive into how to find one’s loan: 1. Find the security name: it will be a year (usually the year of origination), a dash, two letters, then a number. It will be somewhere in one of your filings. For this we’ll use a random First Franklin loan, 2005-FF1. [Note; they would just sequentially number them, so the first security First Franklin floated in 2005 would be FF1, then FF2, etc...] 1. Go to the SEC’s new search engine: Company Search 2. Click the first link, Company or fund name… 3. Choose the radio button marked “contains” and type in the ticker; that is 2005-FF1 4. There will be multiple filings but one of them will be marked 424B5. Click that, it’s the prospectus. If you really want to have fun, and want to know what happened after 2008 when these all disappeared, type the ticer (again, 2005-FF1) into the full text link from the first search page. There you’ll see lots and lots of filings as pieces and parts of the security are blasted everywhere. To track yours you have to find which tranche you ended up in. Sometimes it’s in the filing but, if not, you can usually figure it out from the prospectus if you know basic origination info (credit-score, type of loan, where the house is, etc…); some even list loan amounts."
  7. This is what was presented by the Iowa Legal Aid Foreclosure Defense Project conference in April, 2010. www.ihoep.com/userfiles/file/Foreclosure.pp NO STANDING Borrowers executed N/M with Fieldstone Mortgage Co. January 5, 2009: Notice to cure sent to borrowers by servicer (Litton). February 2, 2009: Mortgage assigned by Fieldstone Mortgage Co. to HSBC as Trustee for Fieldstone Investment Trust. Foreclosure filed by HSBC as Trustee. MSJ ruling: PSA governs how mortgages may be acquired and foreclosed upon. The PSA and TSA only authorize mortgages that are “current” to be transferred to the trust. Thus, mortgage inappropriately transferred to the trust. Trustee has no authority or standing to bring foreclosure. Trustee only has authority granted to it by explicit terms of trust. **This is why I was interested in checking out the Pooling and Service Agreement that is critical to my loan. BONYM was assigned the loan 8/2011. A LOD was sent by BOA as servicer on 10/2010. That means that according to those two documents our loan was NOT CURRENT and therefore shouldn't have been assigned to BONYM who is the Trustee for the Investors. Then in March of 2012 BONYM filed FC. Which is a direct violation of of the PSA agreement-am I correct? And this is why I think the PSA may be critical in instances where Countrywide is anyway involved in a FC.
  8. Wow, 5 years!!! that's impressive. I guess I need to start reading back on your posts!! Yeah, isn't it a shame, we love our home[/i}. It's always been more than a just a house to us. And with that comes a responsibility to maintain and even enhance it. Other than planting like we always do (My husband has a very green thumb and he makes all my garden "visions" come true), we really have put any necessary repairs on the back burner. But dang, I would hate to not have my garage door opener. Winters in the upper Midwest are tough and I would despise having to get out to open the flipping door. Try Brad'slist or you know what, you can pry find one for free.
  9. Hey Vettegirl, We're giving it our best shot. As far as the AG, we just received a letter from our BOA "Account Manager" (whatever) and she explained that the *** Attorney General had contacted their Corporate Offices and that our "file" was moved into escalation for the DOJ determination. So, we continue not to hold our breath and yet are able to plant all our garden pots and the garden, praying we get to see everything bloom and grow. *sigh*
  10. Sorry LE, I meant to type WITHOUT Prejudice. And to burst my own bubble, upon reading the actual motion, I think they are only correcting how they initially filed for FC in naming the defendants. The motion states that because there are no other parties in question besides my DH and I, they asked for a Motion To Dismiss Other Parties In Possession. The original motion names the defendants as "Mickey Mouse and Minnie Mouse, and any other Parties In Possession". In affect, their amending this. So it doesn't really change anything. Poo....sounds like I'm going to have to kick the Seven Dwarfs, Goofy, and The Little Mermaid out immediately.
  11. Well dang....today It was recorded by the Atty for BONYM that they are filing a Motion to Dismiss With Prejudice-Parties in Possession. Wow-me thinks someone rapped their knuckles for jumping the gun. Anyhoo, a short reprieve before the hounds are let loose again. ::travolta::
  12. Good for you!! another one(Midland) bites the dust! :BigDance::BigDance:
  13. Well, LE, If and when I go to court, because my Motion to dismiss was denied. How would I bring this particular *issue* to light???
  14. Exactly, and in my case that would be BONY-Mellon as Investor was assigned last year by Countrywide/BOA, with BOA being the servicer. BONY-Mellon initiated FC last month. Ironically, now it is BOA that is contacting me in order to stem the FC proceedings??? WTH?
  15. Thanks, I do plan on being there. All of you on these boards have been a tremendous help and inspiration. I truly appreciate all of your input.