Property foreclosure Fraud – What You Can’t say for sure Can Hurt You


It has been happening for a calendar year or more in large numbers. The reason the media hasn’t got on this story is an excellent concern to ask…

I don’t think everyone realizes how big this area connected with fraud is or may believe that it’s genuinely transpiring. The biggest reason is probably that the jurídico system is a player in this area connected with fraud. Not as an active battler but more as a guilty bystander. In about half of the expresses in the Union, foreclosures need to be brought in a lawsuit by a judge, otherwise called judicial expresses. One would think that in nonjudicial states, it would be much easier to evade fraud because the legal process is not usually involved. Unfortunately but it might even be quicker to commit Foreclosure Fraud with judicial states because not any one’s asking almost any questions in these foreclosure conditions as I think that just about anyone will automatically assume that the Jurídico System would exert a great deal more quality control to prevent this massive fraud to work it has the way through the system. Think again…

Statistically speaking, 98% of all foreclosure cases, process or nonjudicial, go uncontested by the borrower. In other words, the particular borrower does nothing to defend themselves in the property foreclosure process. In a judicial expression, an uncontested foreclosure issue results in a Default Judgment against the borrower/defendant. Any promises made by Plaintiff will be accepted as valid and legit at face value. The particular presiding judges, at least through Florida, are doing next to nothing to inspect the merits of the watch case based on the documents produced instructions which, by the way, are minor – or the precise accuracy of the documents that are made. Yes, they are slammed in addition to overrun with foreclosure cases. Not any; it’s no excuse to help deny citizens due practice.

Here in Florida, 80-90% of the cases are being filed without evidence of the debt, which is an original Promissory Note, not many early copies of it. Create a sampling of 12 or 100 cases registered in court, and you’ll find this true. Put simply, a company/institution is coming directly into court, suing a customer and alleging that the customer owes them $_______. Of course, really fill in the bare… and they are producing NO WRITTEN EVIDENCE that this allegation provides any truth.

Also, it gets better. They may be alleging that they lost the actual Note (or it was destroyed). If I gave you the $1000 check, would you get crazy? How about if I gave you the $50 000 check? In what you15479 treat that little document? But lo and view, these institutions say that in 80-90% of the instances, they have lost the Information! Let’s put this particular in perspective… in Jan 2009, Lee County, FLORIDA, had about 2200 foreclosure cases filed. Therefore let’s do the math

with each other, shall we? That would place us at over 1700 instances where the Notes were strangely LOST! And that’s just one month’s worth, folks. A person with just a bit of common sense might say something’s fishy with this particular. No? But most judges appear to have taken no issue with this particular. Doesn’t this fact make you, the reader, say to yourself, “this is not right; something’s up here; there should be a study into this. ” However, our judicial program seems to have no problem with this and even asks the more profound issue as to “why? ”

However, it gets better… not only have they “lost” the notes, but the mortgages that were “recorded” in public places records after closing (to declare to the public involving who has a lawful lien against it on this property) are in another woman’s name. Let’s call these people “ABC Lender. ” And so ABC Lender is the “mortgagee” of record in the vital records. But ABC Lender is simply not the Plaintiff suing intended for Foreclosure! No, it’s XYZ Lender who is the Individual; and in XYZ Lender’s Real estate foreclosure Complaint, they allege likely the owner and holder on the Note (that was lost) and the mortgage was given to them. The problem (besides zero note, of course) is there’s no Assignment of Loan recorded in Public Records; wow, and no Lost Note Statement of facts either, which should undoubtedly be required.

Public records still present ABC Lender as the mortgagee. More than that, XYZ Lender/Plaintiff makes that very mortgage (which they might print online from the Clerk of Court’s website) into their Foreclosure Complaint and then merely states, for the record, how the Mortgage (in ABC Lender’s name) was assigned directly to them. But no assignment is recorded NOR is a project even produced in the foreclosures case in at least half of the cases. And when all of us do see a Job produced, lo and

catch a glimpse of, you know who drafted in which Assignment of Mortgage? Please let me answer that… it’s the practice that filed the real estate foreclosure complaint for the Plaintiff. Consider that, so you’re sharing with me that now foreclosure lawyers are also in the business of switching mortgages and notes? I do think not. But this is precisely what is occurring, folks. Sure, as these fingers are typing this kind of post.

Oh, but I am going to do you one better… before I do, all of what I only stated above is enough intended for XYZ Lender to be awarded foreclosure in 98% of the cases because these ALLEGATIONS by simply XYZ Lender are never possibly challenged by the borrower/defendant. Hence the court places the evidence RUBBER STAMP on this fraudulence, and away you go… “NEXT” as a general rule, Florida Judges would claim… all in about 15 moments in their self-proclaimed ROCKET DOCKETS. Nice.

So back to undertaking one better… in this 2% of cases where the consumer does even a little a thing to defend themselves or a great deal better, has a competent attorney signify them against this FRAUD, we’d ask the Plaintiff to prove their case. You already know, “excuse me, but My spouse and i don’t think your claims are generally true, Mr. XYZ Supplier. Yes, I borrowed as well as owe the money to somebody, but I have no idea whatsoever who YOU are, and I don’t think We owe the money to you, and i also don’t think that you have any correct whatsoever to be here in this particular court suing me aiming to take my home from me. ” That’s could say it a minimum of, but attorneys are a bit more verbose than me…

Therefore guess what these Plaintiff/XYZ Lender come back with to that demand… you’re going to love this… “If it will please the courtroom, your honor, these demands are out of line and merely meant to ‘stall’ the procedure. The defendant hasn’t compensated their mortgage in ____ months, your honour; which requests for us to disclose who the real owners of the home finance loan and note are little-known

information, and we are not instructed to disclose that information. Micron Oh, I’m sorry, I thought you alleged in your original criticism that YOU were the owner in addition to the holder… now someone else is definitely, but you can’t tell us? Interesting. By the way, 15 U. Nasiums. C. 1641(f)(2) says the fact that Servicers are under federal government obligation to disclose the true operator of the obligation. Read the federal government law here! Scroll to paragraph “F” part 2 . not

Yep, you’re tracking by himself now…. it gets better yet. Somehow, by some magic of St. Mary, mommy of Jesus, the Note-like magic appears in some cases! Oh, thank bliss, the Note has come out. So XYZ Lender sets the court and everyone more on notice with a “Notice of Filing Original Documents” in the court record. Into the unsuspecting citizen, this Observe, purportedly a copy of the Unique Note, sure does look good. Never mind that one of this Paperwork can be re-created out of nothing. Have we Alzheimer’s that bad, folks? I mean, what exactly gives? Have we not been

talking, ranting, and raving about all the FRAUD this occurred in the mortgage marketplace and WALL STREET these recent 7-8 years? Does not a soul think that these Notes tend to be not being re-created? I’m talking about XYZ Lender’s trust before the court that the Take note was Lost. Was it a lie, or is the Take note they are now producing fraud? After all, which one is it? Or will our judicial system gonna let them do both… Lay and commit Fraud, that may be.

But you see, I have a tad bit more knowledge about this whole “SECURITIZATION THING” than the unsuspecting house owner and probably even these foreclosure attorneys representing these financial institutions. Since the mid-80, when the Secondary Mortgage Industry Enhancement Reform Act of 1984 was enacted, 00% of all residential mortgages are already securitized. The opposite of a Securitized Loan is what we phone a Portfolio Loan. These are generally our two options, individuals… it’s either a Portfolio Personal loan or a Securitized Loan. Your honour is actually either Option A or perhaps Option B. Not THE TWO.

So let me break this specific down into bite-sized parts. A Portfolio loan is a loan where ABC Loan company makes the loan (i.e. deepens the money) and helps to keep that loan in their “portfolio” for the life of the personal loan. ABC Lender will keep your loan, service the personal loan and manage it until it is finally paid off. This “portfolio lending” thing is PREHISTORIC, folks. This is a bona fide truth.

So, Option B, your current honour, is this thing we all call “Securitization. ” And also yes, your honor, I actually expect that we all please UNDERSTAND IT because these 1000s of CASES before your the courtroom involve PEOPLE, human beings (the same people who elected an individual, by the way) and their lifestyles, and their credit and their responsibility if this ‘ain’t done proper.

Sorry about that; as you might think, I am perturbed with the “pleading ignorance” of the courts as well as worse “I just have a tendency care” judges whose terry answer is that “the borrower/defendant hasn’t paid their home finance loan in 6 months so place justice and matters connected with law aside because these people all a bunch of deadbeats. My partner and i read the Wall Street Journal article on Feb. 18, 2009. We can easily all read between the wrinkles, your honour… Now allow saying this real

easy before I give an overview of securitization and its use in foreclosure conditions… Not all judges are created similarly. Some very good ones in existence care about the law and due process so that the law is followed. For anyone judges out there who usually are letting these issues bad swept under the rug due to the fact it’s so damn “inconvenient” – all these foreclosure situations -we thank you. We expect you’ll see that more of your respective peers adopt the exact placement.

By the way, the question the judges referred to in the WSJ story asked, “Are an individual paying your mortgage and therefore are you living in your home? Inches – these two concerns are inappropriate and immaterial to the case and law matters. If I’m a homeowner and know how to start, who has my mortgage, and this inquiry into this simple fact goes unanswered? I am just not paying ANYONE until eventually; I figure this out and about already! So if I”m ahead of that judge, my reply is clear: “Excuse us, your honour, but in which question is utterly immaterial for you to my case before you. My spouse and I owe the money to an individual, but I typically dispute the assertion by the Plaintiff that we owe the money to them.

I asked them to provide appropriate and authentic documentation, which I owe them the cash, and they have failed to provide documentation. Their documentation appears to be a complete scam in this court. Therefore I might humbly request your recognition and look into the material facts in this instance, not whether or not I have to pay someone I don’t know exists or if I am living in a home to which I possess a valid title. Inch – and Judge Gary, the gadget guy. Keith Cary, the Chief Determine in Lee County, stated, “A guy hasn’t compensated his mortgage in a yr; what’s there to talk about? I believe I’ve presented lots to talk about very well- well, your recognition. If not, let me proceed…

Ok, securitization and how the idea applies to a judicial real estate foreclosure case. In securitization to assist entities who are the “players” in this process. Not all organizations are created the same because they will vary ROLES in the securitization course of action. Roles: Originator, Sponsor, Get better at Servicer, Depositor, Issuer, Trustee and Custodian are the principal ones. We also might send straight to a “Special Servicer” in the mixture here and there. The Originator is usually ABC Lender in the earlier mentioned fictitious case I stated. XYZ Lender from above could be the Sponsor, usually the Servicer.

People in 99. 9% of those loans, the Trust is the owner of the loan. The Believe in comprises several to many hundred investors who use a “piece” of the loan. And then that… EVERY financial loan, including the specific loan within our fictitious case above, continues to be bought and sold NO LESS THAN 3-4 occasions. When a Note is sold/transferred (and it is a genuine purchase, by the way), the Notice MUST be endorsed, just like an examination. From one payee to the next. When the loan was securitized, which is very safe to imagine every loan is/was, it will have NO LESS THAN 3 endorsements about the actual, ORIGINAL note that has the borrower/defendant’s wet signature bank on it.

So when XYZ Loan provider produces the “Original” Notice for the court, and it has NO endorsements on it, it’s a strategy that we refer to as a FRAUD, folks — one way or another, it is NOT the original, neither is it a copy of the initial note OR, in the substitute, XYZ Lender lied on the SEC, the Securities along with Exchange Commission AND the INTEREST RATES. You see, in securitization, doing this activity MUST be disclosed. Zero, it’s not proprietary or discreet; it’s PUBLIC DISCLOSURE. All these documents filed with the SECOND are very specific.

The players concerned are all disclosed. Their TASKS are disclosed, and the SEQUENCE OF OWNERSHIP of the funding in the Asset Pool is usually disclosed. The governing or maybe operative document for this mortgage pool is the Pooling along with Servicing Agreement, unveiled. These Trusts are choosing to be treated as a REMIC (short for Real Estate Loan Investment Conduit), which provides Access way Taxation on the pool cash flow so that the Trust avoids double-taxation. That’s disclosed, and tight guidelines of the chain involving ownership AND timelines involving ownership must be adhered to. Or perhaps the REMIC status will be/can be revoked by the INTEREST RATES.

So when XYZ Lender comes into a court of law and carries out all these allegations of control, produces nothing to speak of, along with expects to take Mrs Smith’s home from her, I would recommend that our judicial system take steps more than turn a sightless eye and claim that is their job to “efficiently dispose” of the case – worn out about 15 seconds — or worse, ask inappropriate questions of that homeowner.

I also suggest that Mrs Cruz defend herself and our local and national media do more to show what you can now call “FORECLOSURE FRAUD” because it’s occurring, ladies and gentlemen. The SAME ORGANIZATIONS that created this worldwide meltdown through greed as well as fraud, who have received countless BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars in order to bail them out of their own gross (and greedy) mismanagement are NOW stealing citizen’s houses from them like a thief from the night to boot. The C should be investigating, prosecuting, and sending these fraudsters for you to jail – both the traditional bank reps/employees AND their law firms colluding with them on this massive fraudulence!

To conclude: Give me any real estate foreclosure case, anyone. 80% or higher of the cases filed with such courts, I can/will prove FRAUD exists in that case. Most we have to do is move the actual SEC documents recorded and compare what they unveiled in that documentation to what they have already stated and alleged from the foreclosure case. This is simple.

Someone’s gotta WHACK THE WHISTLE… I’m your current Huckleberry.

Read also: