WildBill

Donna Baran-Fights Foreclosure

Recommended Posts

Its the Archived audio.

Shes been fighting since 2006.

Was able to pay and pay off her home, but chose to fight.

And fight she did. Sharp lady.

Audio interview starts 8 minutes in, after the music.

http://www.republicbroadcasting.org/archives/index.php?cmd=archives.month&ProgramID=11&year=10&month=11&backURL=index.php%253Fcmd%253Darchives.getyear%2526ProgramID%253D11%26year%3D10%26backURL%3Dindex.php%253Fcmd%253Darchives

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pre-trial Hearing Transcript

'I know from personal experience that whenever anyone writes, he has an opportunity to think, consider, write, consider again, edit, and delete whatever comments he deems imprudent or rewrite to conceal that which he doesn’t want exposed.

That which is written is always drafted with the audience in mind. How much do I want to tell them? How much do I want to conceal?

On the other hand, oral statements–especially when the speaker is under stress–are far less guarded, far less “edited,” and potentially much more revealing.

Thus, whenever you read a law book or even case law, you read a “sanitized” description of the law drafted by someone who is normally very astute as to what should and should not be revealed. But when you read trial transcripts, you can see the “real” law in its most unguarded, raw and sometimes brutal majesty. The difference between the case law written by judges and the transcripts of the trial are much like the differences between a biology book’s dry description of a feline’s digestive process and actually watching feeding time at the lion cage at the zoo.

That’s why I love trial transcripts. They can be long and sometimes tedious, but they’ll show you, teach you, the real law.

When I read transcripts, I can “see” the battle. I can see the struggle as lawyers try to compel witnesses to incriminate or discredit themselves, as judge’s try to manipulate the case, and as witnesses try to think on their feet and avoid saying something that is stupid or self-destructive.

I see the punches, the blocks, and the counter-punches. As I read, I can almost hear each party gasp for breath as they fight to survive or escape the back alley brawls that take place in our courts every day.

Transcripts excite me. Not merely for the violence they record, but for the revelations they provide. In the “heat” of battle, witnesses, lawyers and even judges say things, blurt things out, that I’m sure they’d regret if they thought anyone would bother to read the transcript. Fortunately (for them), virtually no one reads trial transcripts and therefore the imprudent statements seldomc come to light.

But I read transcripts.

As I said, they excite me.

Piss on the case law. Piss on the law books.

Those sanitized descriptions reveal only what the system is willing to let you see. Transcripts reveal the real law in its most raw, brutal and sometimes brilliant magnificence.

Donna Baran is an intelligent, educated, and courageous woman who has successfully defended her home against foreclosure for at least two years. Her understanding is not perfect, but she’s learned more about the law in less time than anyone else I’ve heard of.

Donna has given the system fits because she knows that the lender sold her mortgage for 102.5% of its value within hours after she signed her mortgage.

Thus, the lender was was paid in full for the loan almost instantly after having advanced the funds to Donna–but has still billed Donna for monthly mortgage payments for the past 15 years.

As a result of selling the mortgage back in the early 1990′s, the people trying to foreclose no longer have the actual mortgage and thus lack standing to foreclose.

They are trying to do with copies of the mortgage that which can only be done with the actual mortgage.

The system would prefer that this information not be discovered by ordinary people since–if their mortgages were also sold by their lenders–the purported “home owners” might realize that they need not make further mortgage payments on their homes.

Therefore, the a series of judges have acted in complicity with the plaintiff’s attorneys to railroad Ms. Baran. Ms. Baran has so far resisted their attempts with remarkable skill, intuition and Blessing. Like I said, she’s given ‘em fits.

One of Donna’s greatest assets is her ability and inclination to buy transcripts of each of her hearings, read and study them, and LEARN what’s really going on.

Her success in frustrating the system is to signficant degree based on her reading and studying her own transcripts. As she reads, she sees the mistakes she made in her last hearing and is far less likely to make those same mistakes again.

As she reads, she sees what the judges or opposing lawyers were trying to do with far greater clarity than was possible in the “heat” of her courtroom “battle”.

As a result, she learns to recognize the tricks the system uses to try to railroad her in one hearing and is able to spot and defeat those tricks insubsequent hearings.

Our judicial system depends on tricks, schemes and presumptions to railroad about 95% of all defendants.

These tricks work just fine on people who have almost never come into a court room. Given the typical witness’ ignorance, tricking them into making self-defeating admissions is like taking candy from babies.

However, the truth is that the system only has a limited number of tricks. Once the litigants learn to recognize and defeat those tricks, the trick-dependent “system” is suddenly badly impaired and almost unable to continue.

By reading the transcripts of her own hearings, Donna has learned to recognize many of their “tricks”.

As a result, she’s become a formidable adversary. For example, a homeowners association that’s trying to sue Donna for unpaid homeowners association dues, has reportedly spent about $50,000 in lawyers fees to try to collect a $5,000 lien.

Makes me laugh. We don’t know how this is going to end, but so far, she’s giving them fits.

What follows is a transcript of Donna’s most recent hearing that’s been decorated with my usual highlighting and comments. Most of my comments are conjectural and not to be relied on.

But if you’ll take time to read the entire document, you’ll begin to see how much is revealed and how much can be gleaned and learned from transcripts.'

Click here for the PDF file: 090811 2009-07-20 BARAN HRG B4 ROUSE hnk

http://adask.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/090811-2009-07-20-baran-hrg-b4-rouse-hnk.pdf

PS...Listen to the interview in the first post. Its a must hear.

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Donna claims that the Lawyers do NOT represent the Original lenders and Banks.

They represent Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

2 un registered entities, unlicensed entities to do business in any of the 50 states, and with no standing to file a claim against anyone.

She thwarted their efforts with evidentiary hearings to cross examine any 'evidence'

A Servicer can not have standing to file a claim against you.

They are steam rolling over people that do not know the law.

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little update on Donna's fight:

According to Volusia County Court Records Case Number 2007 30375.

On 12/20/2010 Donna denied for a Supreme Court hearing.

11/23/2010 Case closed

Donna eventually lost, and has been ordered by the courts to pay $40,789 in attorneys fees.

7/21/2010 Order for distribution/distribution to Florida Default Law Group in the amount of $173,312.82

9/29/2009 Her home was sold to Gorilla Capital at auction.

8/25/2009 Final Order/ Judgment of Foreclosure

Just curious WildBill, who is the real shill on here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Even deadbeats need a folk hero...

The Mortgage and Banking Industry is Ripe with Fraud, Bailouts and Bonuses.

Donna Baran and others like her, exposed them and their fraud.

If fighting a fraudulent foreclosure is a deadbeat, so be it.

Props to her.

MSNBC: ”This crisis is all about fraud . . . . There were millions of acts of fraud. . . . this corrupt banking system . . . .”

Fraud is criminal.

The Fraudclosure scandal involves the institutionalized theft of millions of American homes and the injury and/or destruction of millions of American families.

When “fraudclosure” is fully understood. Banks will fail. The federal government and the Federal Reserve will be implicated, tainted, and discredited.

In truth, the current foreclosure fraud scandal is exposing a massive, criminal conspiracy between bankers, lawyers, judges and even congressmen and presidents to rob the American people, loot the economy and destroy the nation.

In this foreclosure fraud we are facing the same forces and the same motives as are glimpsed behind the federal government’s refusal to defend our borders. The nation is being destroyed by its own government. And that tragedy may make your cry.

Given that Ron Paul has already moved to “End the Fed,” the coming revelations concerning “fraudclosure” may be sufficient to finally precipitate the Federal Reserve’s demise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our judicial system depends on tricks, schemes and presumptions to railroad about 95% of all defendants.

I seldom find myself in agreement with the more "eccentric" positions taken by some of our members, but I have to admit, Wildbill, you've nailed it here.

I want to qualify that by adding that I don't think the system is inherently bad. It's been corrupted by liars and thieves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the foreclosure mess was a crisis of multiple parties all claiming ownership of the debt, then you may have a point. In the end, that's the point of having a recording system.

That's not the problem we have here. We have consensual parties in default looking for undotted 'i's and uncrossed 't's trying to escape what they perceive to be a bad bargain. So if home prices went up, these parties would have privatized the equity gains. When home prices dropped, they scream fraud and throw the losses on taxpayers. Worse, many don't even want to hand over the collateral and escape the deficiency. They want to hang onto the collateral too.

Many of these hair brain schemes are based on theories where lenders were inherently fraudulent due to our fractional reserve banking system or where a bank didn't comply with one of the hundreds of technicalities of securitization. I wish I had a dime for every time someone quoted some nutjob stating that the lender can't foreclose because the loan has been securitized.

I'm thinking about partnering up with a senior attorney and freelancing for banks and credit unions by handling some of their foreclsoure work. My bill rate is less than half of what firms charge, and it would be done better. Get these deadbeats out asap. They're mucking up the entire system with their greed & ignorance. There are plenty of rentals.

Edited by jq26

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If the foreclosure mess was a crisis of multiple parties all claiming ownership of the debt, then you may have a point. In the end, that's the point of having a recording system.

That's not the problem we have here. We have consensual parties in default looking for undotted 'i's and uncrossed 't's trying to escape what they perceive to be a bad bargain.

So if home prices went up, these parties would have privatized the equity gains. When home prices dropped, they scream fraud and throw the losses on taxpayers. Worse, many don't even want to hand over the collateral and escape the deficiency. They want to hang onto the collateral too.

Many of these hair brain schemes are based on theories where lenders were inherently fraudulent due to our fractional reserve banking system or where a bank didn't comply with one of the hundreds of technicalities of securitization. I wish I had a dime for every time someone quoted some nutjob stating that the lender can't foreclose because the loan has been securitized.

Its exactly the problem we have, and even worse..and the nutjobs are those like you supporting the system at hand, and worse, Shilling for it.

The debt is paid for, At Closing, with our signature.

The debt is then sold, banks are able to loan more money, and we are billed for a debt we just created with our signature and actually paid for, and pay it at interest, 2-3xs the amount of the money created.

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.'

-Henry Ford

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just a little update on Donna's fight:

According to Volusia County Court Records Case Number 2007 30375.

On 12/20/2010 Donna denied for a Supreme Court hearing.

11/23/2010 Case closed

Donna eventually lost, and has been ordered by the courts to pay $40,789 in attorneys fees.

7/21/2010 Order for distribution/distribution to Florida Default Law Group in the amount of $173,312.82

9/29/2009 Her home was sold to Gorilla Capital at auction.

8/25/2009 Final Order/ Judgment of Foreclosure

Just curious WildBill, who is the real shill on here?

Turns out, Donnas case has Re opened in the lower court.

And case is active and pending in the Supreme Court in FL.

Not all parties were served, a huge court violation, so Judge will likely be recused, and the case will be overturned!

He will be the 3rd Judge dismissed from the case for improper procedures.

I would not bet against Donna, and all of her valuables will have to be returned to her by the Banksters, along with her home, and her counter claims hopefully awarded to her.

Her issue was Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Evidenciary hearings and wet copy of her mortgage, note, (Marked Paid in Full) And Title.

And who again is the Shill?

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The essence of “foreclosure-gate” is that the banks that made the original mortgage loans have in many, perhaps most, maybe all instances of mortgages issued over the past 10 to perhaps 20 years, SOLD the original note and/or mortgage to a third party.

Once the bank sold either the note or the mortgage, that bank has no more standing to foreclose on a particular house than I do to drive a car I sold to someone else five years ago.

The banks have been foreclosing on properties without legal authority to do so. Not a few properties. Hundreds of thousands. Maybe 1 to 2 million.

This is not a paperwork error. This is fraud and a massive, industry-wide criminal conspiracy that will put some of very rich, greedy bastards in prison and some others in the morgue. This fraud not only involves bankers and lawyers and judges (Ohh, my!)–it involves your government which passed laws to allow this fraud to take place. Your government is complicit in stealing your home.

Evidence of governmental complicity is seen in the fact that 40 state attorney generals have begun a coordinated investigation of the foreclosure fraud. Banks like JP Morgan Chase have suspended foreclosure procedures in all 50 states. The problem is not isolated. It is systemic.

It is institutionalized. It couldn’t be this big without government complicity.

More, when the original lenders sold the note/mortgage, they apparently sold it for full face value. That means that if you borrowed $200,000 to buy/build a new home, the bank probably sold your note/mortgage for $200,000 just as soon as you walked out of the bank. That means that the bank that loaned the $200,000 was PAID IN FULL on the principal of the loan before you made your first monthly mortgage payment. Thus, the bank not only has no legal standing to collect on your note or foreclose if you default, they have no moral standing to collect/foreclose.

And yet, the bank continued to collect mortgage payments from you–perhaps for 20 or 30 years–after being paid in full on the principal within the first hours or weeks of negotiating the loan. The bank was seeking to be PAID TWICE for the loan: Once, when they sold the loan to a third party; and again, over the course of the next 20 to 30 years as YOU paid off the $500,000 balance on your $200,000 mortgage.

The 3rd party that bought your mortgage apparently used it as a security in a bank vault which, under fractional reserve banking, allowed the third party (usually another bank; frequently a foreign bank) to lend ten or more times the face value of YOUR note/mortgage to its customers.

Thus, the 3rd party owner of your $200,000 note/mortgage/security could lend $2 million per year. If they charged 10% interest on these loans (and they probably got that much or more up until the last 2 years), they could net $200,000 a year in interest on the $2 million in loans based on having purchased YOUR $200,000 note/mortgage.

Thus, for a $200,000 investment (buying your note/mortgage), a 3rd party bank might be able to generate a $200,000 annual “profit” (interest). That’s a 100% Return On Investment (ROI) in a world where mere mortals hope and dream of getting an 8% ROI in the stock market.

And why is the 3rd party bank able to generate such extraordinary profits? Because YOU signed a note and/or mortgage. YOUR SIGNATURE made your note/mortgage worth $200,000. Get that? YOUR SIGNATURE was worth $200,000.

More, note that while you are paying maybe $15,000 a year to pay off your mortgage for 30 years to a bank that has no standing to collect the debt, the 3rd party bank might be making $200,000 a year off YOUR SIGNATURE. The 3rd party bank is potentially generating an annual profit equal to the price of your home every freaking year for the life of your mortgage/note. In theory, over the life of a 30 year mortgage, the 3rd party bank will use YOUR SIGNATURE to generate enough profits to pay for THIRTY homes just like the one you’re trying to buy.

In theory, over the life of your 30 year mortgage, YOUR SIGNATURE might generate enough profits to pay for THIRTY homes just like yours–and you’re not getting even one of those 30 homes for free. Instead, you’re paying $500,000 over 30 years for your $200,000 home.

Given that your bank is being paid at least twice for your mortgage, and the 3rd party bank could be generating profits equal to 30 times the price of your home–where is your MORAL obligation to continue paying on your mortgage?

Finally, while the foreclosure fraud scandal is growing, the problem is not limited to just those homes that are in foreclosure.

The larger truth appears to be that the banks have sold the notes/mortgages on ALL of those homes that are current on their mortgage payments. This means that the banks probably don’t have standing to collect ANY mortgage payments.

But it gets worse. Because those notes/mortgages have been reportedly “sliced and diced” into “derivatives” it may be impossible to find any of the notes/mortgages. This raises the extraordinary possibility that the chain of title to all of these millions of American homes may be (as one judge reportedly said) “irretrievably broken”. This might mean that there is NO TITLE to millions of American homes.

The legal implications are huge. If the titles to millions of homes no longer exist or are at least clouded, who would buy a home in this market? It’s like buying a new Cadillac from some guy on the street for $1,000. It’s one helluva deal, but you can’t get a title to go with the car. You know damn well the car is stolen. Will you pay even $1,000 for a car without a title? Not if you’re smart.

Same thing with homes which have clouded or non-existent titles.

Thus, as evidence of the massive fraud underlying “foreclosure-gate” reaches American consumers, home sales and home prices should fall dramatically.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan addressed the Council on Foreign Relations on September 15th and advised that the American economy was slowly “recovering” and that there was cause for cautious optimism–unless the price of homes fell further. Greenspan apparently sees home prices as the US economy’s lynch pin.

Well, since September 15th, the foreclosure fraud has begun to receive national, mainstream media attention. Buyers are increasingly reluctant to buy homes whose titles are “clouded”. Sellers are forced to sell (if they can) for lower and lower prices.

If Greenspan’s warning to the CFR (that housing prices are the economy’s lynch pin) was correct, the current foreclosure fraud scandal may be enough to precipitate the COLLAPSE of our national economy.

And it’s conceivable that such collapse might happen very suddenly.

It strikes me as a virtual certainty that major banks and lenders like JP Morgan Chase, GMAC and Bank of America are likely to be destroyed by an avalanche of litigation and criminal charges.

The same financial institutions that were “bailed out” with billions of dollars in A.D. 2009, may be destroyed by the consequences of their own fraud. The impact on the economy may be devastating.

The criminal fraud that’s been perpetrated by banks, lawyers, judges and government over the past 10 to 20 years may be about to cause a national calamity of a magnitude unseen since the American Civil War.

Bear in mind that much of what I’m writing is conjectural. Some of what I’ve written will probably turn out to be mistaken. In some regards I may have exaggerated the problem and consequences, but in others, I may have understated. We are just beginning to get a handle on this problem.

However, awareness is growing exponentially. Just a month ago, the problem was barely in the news. Only a handful of people (like Donna Baran who’s been on my radio program several times) had any idea of the problem’s extent or fraudulent foundation.

The news and awareness is spreading like wildfire.

Like most Americans, you might not understand this problem today, but over the course of the next few weeks, you’ll probably see so many reports and allegations in the mainstream news that it’ll be impossible for you to remain uninformed or indifferent to “foreclosure-gate”.

By the time the November election takes place, you, and most other Americans, may be SCREAMING for retribution against bankers, lawyers, judges, and politicians responsible for allowing the banksters to systematically rob the American people.

In fact, it’s not impossible that the only way the bankers et al may be able to keep the funds they’ve stolen and escape retribution is to intentionally cause an economic collapse that is so severe that the criminals can escape in the resulting chaos."

Edited by WildBill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mortgage loan applicant has to put a certain amount of money down on the loan. Those funds are delivered to the mortgage lender, which is a bank.

Through the legal yet unlawful practice of fractional reserve lending, the bank utilizes its franchise to create credit by making a double entry accounting record as follows: a mortgage loan is created that is 10, 20, or 30 times the amount of the down payment deposited. This is recorded as an asset, which is a debit.

A corresponding liability is created for the payoff to the seller that will occur at closing. This is a credit. The bank is in compliance with the minimum reserve rules because it obtained a down payment. Now the funds have been created through the fiction of fractional reserve lending.

The mortgage applicant did not create the credit.

The credit was created pursuant to the special rules for the banks that allow them to create credit from nothing. The security deed and note actually fail due to lack of consideration. The mortgage lender did not actually lend its own money (so they are not lawfully entitled to interest on it). The closing documents state that a loan was made, but the mortgage lender did not part with any of its cash that existed prior to the loan application. Rather, it used a statutory law to create new credit. The seller was paid with bank credit that eventually got to his bank account.

So if one is contesting a mortgage, I believe one should attack the fraud in the security deed and note, that being that the mortgage lender actually gave no consideration in exchange for the promise to pay, so the agreement fails for lack of consideration. This is also a good cause for the borrower to revoke the power of attorney granted in the security deed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in support of your post,

Google "Whistle blower files complaint WITH THE SEC against Chase Bank"

The lady who filed the complaint, alleges serious violations pertaining to fraud within CHASE BANK.

If you can't find the article, I will be happy to post it here. The complaint was filed by her attorney.

The Mortgage industry is all about SECURITIZATION...JUST LIKE THE CREDIT CARD INDUSTRY.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The essence of “foreclosure-gate” is that the banks that made the original mortgage loans have in many, perhaps most, maybe all instances of mortgages issued over the past 10 to perhaps 20 years, SOLD the original note and/or mortgage to a third party.

Once the bank sold either the note or the mortgage, that bank has no more standing to foreclose on a particular house than I do to drive a car I sold to someone else five years ago.

The banks have been foreclosing on properties without legal authority to do so. Not a few properties. Hundreds of thousands. Maybe 1 to 2 million.

This is not a paperwork error. This is fraud and a massive, industry-wide criminal conspiracy that will put some of very rich, greedy bastards in prison and some others in the morgue. This fraud not only involves bankers and lawyers and judges (Ohh, my!)–it involves your government which passed laws to allow this fraud to take place. Your government is complicit in stealing your home.

Evidence of governmental complicity is seen in the fact that 40 state attorney generals have begun a coordinated investigation of the foreclosure fraud. Banks like JP Morgan Chase have suspended foreclosure procedures in all 50 states. The problem is not isolated. It is systemic.

It is institutionalized. It couldn’t be this big without government complicity.

More, when the original lenders sold the note/mortgage, they apparently sold it for full face value. That means that if you borrowed $200,000 to buy/build a new home, the bank probably sold your note/mortgage for $200,000 just as soon as you walked out of the bank. That means that the bank that loaned the $200,000 was PAID IN FULL on the principal of the loan before you made your first monthly mortgage payment. Thus, the bank not only has no legal standing to collect on your note or foreclose if you default, they have no moral standing to collect/foreclose.

And yet, the bank continued to collect mortgage payments from you–perhaps for 20 or 30 years–after being paid in full on the principal within the first hours or weeks of negotiating the loan. The bank was seeking to be PAID TWICE for the loan: Once, when they sold the loan to a third party; and again, over the course of the next 20 to 30 years as YOU paid off the $500,000 balance on your $200,000 mortgage.

The 3rd party that bought your mortgage apparently used it as a security in a bank vault which, under fractional reserve banking, allowed the third party (usually another bank; frequently a foreign bank) to lend ten or more times the face value of YOUR note/mortgage to its customers.

Thus, the 3rd party owner of your $200,000 note/mortgage/security could lend $2 million per year. If they charged 10% interest on these loans (and they probably got that much or more up until the last 2 years), they could net $200,000 a year in interest on the $2 million in loans based on having purchased YOUR $200,000 note/mortgage.

Thus, for a $200,000 investment (buying your note/mortgage), a 3rd party bank might be able to generate a $200,000 annual “profit” (interest). That’s a 100% Return On Investment (ROI) in a world where mere mortals hope and dream of getting an 8% ROI in the stock market.

And why is the 3rd party bank able to generate such extraordinary profits? Because YOU signed a note and/or mortgage. YOUR SIGNATURE made your note/mortgage worth $200,000. Get that? YOUR SIGNATURE was worth $200,000.

More, note that while you are paying maybe $15,000 a year to pay off your mortgage for 30 years to a bank that has no standing to collect the debt, the 3rd party bank might be making $200,000 a year off YOUR SIGNATURE. The 3rd party bank is potentially generating an annual profit equal to the price of your home every freaking year for the life of your mortgage/note. In theory, over the life of a 30 year mortgage, the 3rd party bank will use YOUR SIGNATURE to generate enough profits to pay for THIRTY homes just like the one you’re trying to buy.

In theory, over the life of your 30 year mortgage, YOUR SIGNATURE might generate enough profits to pay for THIRTY homes just like yours–and you’re not getting even one of those 30 homes for free. Instead, you’re paying $500,000 over 30 years for your $200,000 home.

Given that your bank is being paid at least twice for your mortgage, and the 3rd party bank could be generating profits equal to 30 times the price of your home–where is your MORAL obligation to continue paying on your mortgage?

Finally, while the foreclosure fraud scandal is growing, the problem is not limited to just those homes that are in foreclosure.

The larger truth appears to be that the banks have sold the notes/mortgages on ALL of those homes that are current on their mortgage payments. This means that the banks probably don’t have standing to collect ANY mortgage payments.

But it gets worse. Because those notes/mortgages have been reportedly “sliced and diced” into “derivatives” it may be impossible to find any of the notes/mortgages. This raises the extraordinary possibility that the chain of title to all of these millions of American homes may be (as one judge reportedly said) “irretrievably broken”. This might mean that there is NO TITLE to millions of American homes.

The legal implications are huge. If the titles to millions of homes no longer exist or are at least clouded, who would buy a home in this market? It’s like buying a new Cadillac from some guy on the street for $1,000. It’s one helluva deal, but you can’t get a title to go with the car. You know damn well the car is stolen. Will you pay even $1,000 for a car without a title? Not if you’re smart.

Same thing with homes which have clouded or non-existent titles.

Thus, as evidence of the massive fraud underlying “foreclosure-gate” reaches American consumers, home sales and home prices should fall dramatically.

Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan addressed the Council on Foreign Relations on September 15th and advised that the American economy was slowly “recovering” and that there was cause for cautious optimism–unless the price of homes fell further. Greenspan apparently sees home prices as the US economy’s lynch pin.

Well, since September 15th, the foreclosure fraud has begun to receive national, mainstream media attention. Buyers are increasingly reluctant to buy homes whose titles are “clouded”. Sellers are forced to sell (if they can) for lower and lower prices.

If Greenspan’s warning to the CFR (that housing prices are the economy’s lynch pin) was correct, the current foreclosure fraud scandal may be enough to precipitate the COLLAPSE of our national economy.

And it’s conceivable that such collapse might happen very suddenly.

It strikes me as a virtual certainty that major banks and lenders like JP Morgan Chase, GMAC and Bank of America are likely to be destroyed by an avalanche of litigation and criminal charges.

The same financial institutions that were “bailed out” with billions of dollars in A.D. 2009, may be destroyed by the consequences of their own fraud. The impact on the economy may be devastating.

The criminal fraud that’s been perpetrated by banks, lawyers, judges and government over the past 10 to 20 years may be about to cause a national calamity of a magnitude unseen since the American Civil War.

Bear in mind that much of what I’m writing is conjectural. Some of what I’ve written will probably turn out to be mistaken. In some regards I may have exaggerated the problem and consequences, but in others, I may have understated. We are just beginning to get a handle on this problem.

However, awareness is growing exponentially. Just a month ago, the problem was barely in the news. Only a handful of people (like Donna Baran who’s been on my radio program several times) had any idea of the problem’s extent or fraudulent foundation.

The news and awareness is spreading like wildfire.

Like most Americans, you might not understand this problem today, but over the course of the next few weeks, you’ll probably see so many reports and allegations in the mainstream news that it’ll be impossible for you to remain uninformed or indifferent to “foreclosure-gate”.

By the time the November election takes place, you, and most other Americans, may be SCREAMING for retribution against bankers, lawyers, judges, and politicians responsible for allowing the banksters to systematically rob the American people.

In fact, it’s not impossible that the only way the bankers et al may be able to keep the funds they’ve stolen and escape retribution is to intentionally cause an economic collapse that is so severe that the criminals can escape in the resulting chaos."

Your analysis is severely fragmented.. Is this really what you believe?! Or are you just trying to be outrageous?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok Bigwoody, you posted

"Your analysis is severely fragmented.. Is this really what you believe?! Or are you just trying to be outrageous? "

Your turn,,,,please explain how...just how is the post "fragmented" ?

I've challenged several attorneys and Credit card OC's using similar arguments, asking them to explain and or dispute this "securitization" process and to provide me with a complete forensic audit of the accounts in question and especially explain why FULL DISCLOSURE IS NEVER MADE, which by the way is in violation of basic contract law.

Let's not be slamming members without being able to explain your rebuttal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ok Bigwoody, you posted

"Your analysis is severely fragmented.. Is this really what you believe?! Or are you just trying to be outrageous? "

Your turn,,,,please explain how...just how is the post "fragmented" ?

I've challenged several attorneys and Credit card OC's using similar arguments, asking them to explain and or dispute this "securitization" process and to provide me with a complete forensic audit of the accounts in question and especially explain why FULL DISCLOSURE IS NEVER MADE, which by the way is in violation of basic contract law.

Let's not be slamming members without being able to explain your rebuttal.

Really now........IF Wild Bill had any clue of how mortgages are sold and packaged on the secondary market, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill had any clue of the reserve requirements of a lender to underwrite a mortgage, package that mortgage, and sell that mortgage, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill could correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and a mortgage servicer, you guessed it, he would correct himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really now........IF Wild Bill had any clue of how mortgages are sold and packaged on the secondary market, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill had any clue of the reserve requirements of a lender to underwrite a mortgage, package that mortgage, and sell that mortgage, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill could correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and a mortgage servicer, you guessed it, he would correct himself.

I think the question remains...If the mortgage has been sold, then who owns the mortgage and/or the note ? AND HAS THE MORTGAGE COMPANY NOT BEEN PAID ALREADY ?

The mortgage service services the account for the owner, but who is allowed to file suit...the servicer or the owner ?

THE RESERVE REQUIREMENTS OF A LENDER ARE TYPICALLY 10-20% OF THE AMOUNT OF THE LOAN SO REQUIRED in UNDERWRITING A MORTGAGE. The borrower IS TYPICALLY REQUIRED TO MAKE A DOWN PAYMENT EQUAL TO 10-20% OF THE LOAN. Now does this not go on the lenders books and qualify the reserve requirements ? If so, why is the lender at risk in this regard ? Also, the question remains...if the note has been sold once or numerous times..then who is the holder in due course, and why should the lender be PAID TWICE ?

I'm asking in good faith...and trying to wrap my head around all of this !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really now........IF .....had any clue of how mortgages are sold and packaged on the secondary market, he would correct himself. ...... would correct himself.

"Well Said Mortgage Man"....8-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really now........IF Wild Bill had any clue of how mortgages are sold and packaged on the secondary market, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill had any clue of the reserve requirements of a lender to underwrite a mortgage, package that mortgage, and sell that mortgage, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill could correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and a mortgage servicer, you guessed it, he would correct himself.

Very good ...now how about sharing these 'clues" with us lest we stumble and fall. Enlighten us please !...and I ask in good faith, so we can begin 'correcting ourselves" Please describe the regulations based on law...not mere conjecture !

and very important...just how do you "correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and the mortgage servicer" ? And if the owner is different than the servicer, is it not required to disclose that difference in the contract, or is it disclosed in accordance with contract law ?

Or is this an "inside secret" not to be revealed ??? hmmmm

And thank you in advance !

Edited by Prosay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nice to see Shills like Prosay and 2nd time here trying to discredit what many of us already know, having witnessed others Win their foreclosure cases.

They work for the other side folks, and thats why theyre here, not to help.

Far as their question goes..

One tactic, if confronted with a foreclosure, is to elect mediation or an evidenciary hearing, to request the title evidencing ownership, or lack thereof..

At the mediation, simply demand the Assignments, i.e., the Assignments which would cure the problem (according to Judge Riegle’s March 31, 2009, opinion, as affirmed by Judge Dawson on December 4, 2009). MERS and/or the lender has been unable to produce any such Assignments — because they almost certainly do not exist.

On September 25, 2009, R.K. Arnold, the President and CEO of MERSCORP, Inc. — the parent corporation of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. was deposed in Alabama.

Arnold is also an Officer of MERS. Arnold admitted MERS does not have a beneficial interest in any mortgage; does not loan money; does not suffer a default if monies are not paid; etc. etc.

The lender who is foreclosing on you is not the lender on your deed of trust. This is ok if all the proper assignments are recorded.

Of course, the lenders set up MERS and very few loans have the proper chain of title. If this has happened to you, then you need to consider getting a Securitization audit to track the deed of trust, and to track the note.

Here's one of the key reasons why homeowners are now demanding a Securitization Audit. It is a new day.

The Homeowner had first the laws of TILA, RESPA, HOEPA and ECOA on his side – and Forensic Audits proved that the banks lied to the homeowners when they gave the loans.

But now again, they lie when they foreclose on his home.

There's an audit to empower homeowners with the laws of the land once again. That's the Securitization Audit.

Was your foreclosure started with just your note? Did they fail to include the deed of trust? Did the lender who started the foreclosure own both the note and the deed? Again, if these two documents are not properly recorded, kept together and utilized by the rightful owner, then you could be suffering through an illegal foreclosure. A securitization audit is the way to find out.

I think a good strategy is to Show the 'lender' a forensic loan audit and a securitization audit and watch him start to finally negotiate.

You may even find that your foreclosure just sort of "disappears".

Put the ball back in your court.

Is it possible to win against these big lenders?

Yes, the homeowner listed below won a suit against Chase and the Judge BARRED the bank from coming forward again to try and foreclose.

The Pretender Lenders have now tried to use all the major parties and some of the minor parties in foreclosures and when tested have failed to prove standing.

Standing is a jurisdictional matter and it basically boils down to

“You don’t belong here, you have no rights to enforce, you have no interest in this litigation, so get out of here and don’t come back.”

They tried MERS, Servicers, Foreclosure Specialty processors, Trustees, originating “lenders” and they come up empty. why because they are all intermediaries and as Judge Holloway put it, the note is not payable to them, the mortgage does not secure them, the obligation is not due to them and therefore they can’t proceed. In non-judicial states they get around this requirement unless the homeowner brings suit.

Bottom Line:

These banks lie and fabricate documents to put them in a position to win. Don’t let them. If you are sick and tired of fighting the bank and their seemingly endless supply of tricks don’t give up.

JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. v George

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, that the order to show cause of defendant IVY MAE JOHNSON, to vacate the January 16, 2008 judgment of foreclosure and sale for the premises located at 47 Rockaway Parkway, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4600, Lot 55, County of Kings), pursuant to CPLR Rule 5015 (a) (4), because plaintiff, JP MORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A., AS TRUSTEE FOR NOMURA ASSET ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2004-AR4, lacked standing to commence the instant action and thus, the Court never had jurisdiction, is granted'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Really now........IF Wild Bill had any clue of how mortgages are sold and packaged on the secondary market, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill had any clue of the reserve requirements of a lender to underwrite a mortgage, package that mortgage, and sell that mortgage, he would correct himself. IF Wild Bill could correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and a mortgage servicer, you guessed it, he would correct himself.

This is a section from a veification notice.

Tell me who needs to be corrected?

This document is our lawful written notice of a dispute of the amount owed (if any) and of the accounting or bookkeeping regarding the above account number and property address for the above borrowers under the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Law found under the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 USC §1601 et seq. and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Law at 15 USC §1692.

PLEASE BE ADVISED that we have checked with experts in the law and with the FTC on the Federal Law above and now understand that your communication to us in prior documents is an attempt to collect on a debt to a third party, thereby making you liable to this law. Only a few months ago the FTC, on a 5 to 0 ruling, made it clear that every ‘servicer’ of a loan AND their attorneys, are subject to this law. If you refuse to comply within the 30 day limit then you are forever banned from doing anything further to collect.

Also ask the bank to correct us on "consederation" or maybe you can correct us?

Four elements of a contract

• A meeting of the minds between the parties demonstrating they both understand and agree to the essentials of the deal

• Consideration (something of value exchanged by each of the parties, such as cash, goods or a promise to do something)

• An agreement to enter into the contract (typically evidenced by both parties signing a written contract, although oral contracts can be valid too in some situations)

• The legal competence of each party, meaning the parties are not minors and are of sound mind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is a section from a veification notice.

Tell me who needs to be corrected?

This document is our lawful written notice of a dispute of the amount owed (if any) and of the accounting or bookkeeping regarding the above account number and property address for the above borrowers under the Federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Law found under the Consumer Credit Protection Act, 15 USC §1601 et seq. and the Fair Debt Collection Practices Law at 15 USC §1692.

PLEASE BE ADVISED that we have checked with experts in the law and with the FTC on the Federal Law above and now understand that your communication to us in prior documents is an attempt to collect on a debt to a third party, thereby making you liable to this law. Only a few months ago the FTC, on a 5 to 0 ruling, made it clear that every ‘servicer’ of a loan AND their attorneys, are subject to this law. If you refuse to comply within the 30 day limit then you are forever banned from doing anything further to collect.

Also ask the bank to correct us on "consederation" or maybe you can correct us?

Four elements of a contract

• A meeting of the minds between the parties demonstrating they both understand and agree to the essentials of the deal

• Consideration (something of value exchanged by each of the parties, such as cash, goods or a promise to do something)

• An agreement to enter into the contract (typically evidenced by both parties signing a written contract, although oral contracts can be valid too in some situations)

• The legal competence of each party, meaning the parties are not minors and are of sound mind

Is this something you sent to your mortgage servicer, asking them to verify the debt?

Actually to correct this would entail using the right letter to get what you are wanting. It appears that you are attempting to send a Qualified Written Request to your loan servicer and going about it in the wrong way, not referencing the proper laws to receive back a proper response from the lender. If this is what you are attempting then there is a sticky thread that will help you prepare this document.

Your second paragraph is an absolutely horrendous attempt since you should be using RESPA laws instead. RESPA laws will tell you that the lender has 30 days to acknowledge receiving your request, and 45 additional days to provide documents pertaining to your request.

When someone sits at a closing table and the mortgage papers are signed, there are two parties present. In the most simple of closings, an agent from a title company is conducting the closing, representing the mortgage company providing the funds. This agent is also a notary public who signs the mortgage documents verifying as a witnesss that the signer is the party on the mortgage.

The other three points are covered, albeit, I am not sure that every party actually knew what they were signing, which really is their own fault, by not paying a couple hundred dollars extra to have an attorney present, or doing proper homework with a financial advisor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You told Wild Bill he would correct himself. Your words

"IF Wild Bill could correctly identify the difference between the owner of the note and a mortgage servicer, you guessed it, he would correct himself."

These 2 paragraphs are from a debt verification letter not a QWR. If you read the second paragraph the FTC agrees with Wild Bill. A mortgage servicer is a third party debt collector they don't own the original debt or mortgage. Therefore they are subject to the FDCPA. Again I ask what should Wild Bill correct himself on?

Are you really in the mortgage business? If so I can see why you don't want people to challenge there mortgages because your not sure all of your i's are dotted and t's crossed. You didn't know a servicer was a third party collector or the time limit for a QWR response. It is 20 days to acknowledge and 60 days to correct issues. See Limit below.

Wall street executives in an interview about their large bonuses they recieved after tring to bankrupt Americans and getting bailed out by the same Americans why they deserved bonuses. Their response was that is the way the system is set up, if you don't like it change the system.

If I challange my note and mortgage and the way it was serviced according to the same system, why am I the deadbeat.

I would like to have you explain the mortgage companies 'consideration' also.

You said Wild Bill did not understand fractional reserve banking. Could you explain this to us? Can you base these explanasions on Hard Facts and show us?

Thank you in advance for any reponses,

Jeff

(e) Duty of loan servicer to respond to borrower inquiries

(1) Notice of receipt of inquiry

(A) In general

If any servicer of a federally related mortgage loan

receives a qualified written request from the borrower (or an

agent of the borrower) for information relating to the servicing

of such loan, the servicer shall provide a written response

acknowledging receipt of the correspondence within 20 days

(excluding legal public holidays, Saturdays, and Sundays) unless

the action requested is taken within such period.

(B) Qualified written request

For purposes of this subsection, a qualified written request

shall be a written correspondence, other than notice on a

payment coupon or other payment medium supplied by the servicer,

that--

(i) includes, or otherwise enables the servicer to

identify, the name and account of the borrower; and

(ii) includes a statement of the reasons for the belief

of the borrower, to the extent applicable, that the account

is in error or provides sufficient detail to the servicer

regarding other information sought by the borrower.

(2) Action with respect to inquiry

Not later than 60 days (excluding legal public holidays,

Saturdays, and Sundays) after the receipt from any borrower of any

qualified written request under paragraph (1) and, if applicable,

before taking any action with respect to the inquiry of the

borrower, the servicer shall--

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right on the twenty and sixty day time limits.

Read section 20 of your mortgage and you will find that the note can be split up and divided, sold, and there is nothing you can do about who owns the note. The duty is to pay the servicer of the note.

Fight paying your obligations all you want, that's your decision. It was Donna Baran's decision too, and my only input to this matter is Wild Bill stepped off on a tangent and I looked up the case and found that Donna Baran lost her case and her home, and owed $40,000 in attorney's fees, according to court documents.

His wild tangent, later in this thread is his own. He is not right. Ask him how he faired in his own home and rental properties he lost to foreclosure.

Fractional Reserve Banking does not pertain to who owns the note. It was sold, as they usually are.

Edited by amortgageman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.