This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
4closureFraud Needs Your Help - IRS Form 938 – I Have No Idea If This Is Important But It Sure is Curious
Al Capone en route to prison for tax evasion
~
So I get this info from a colleague of mine back in June 2010 in where they had it sent to them from a reader of their site ...
First up, from my colleague...
Sometimes
this all becomes a bit too overwhelming, trying to unravel this whole
foreclosure cataclysm. This is so far beyond the simple situation
where a borrower borrows money from a bank and doesn’t pay… that bank
is clearly entitled to their money back.
I’m
a fairly bright guy with a good education and a fair to ‘middlin
grasp on complex legal issues… I just boil down way complex stuff to
smaller parts and learn those complex issues piece by piece. The
problem we face in foreclosures today is no-one has any idea who’s
really owed money on these mortgages, who is entitled to collect
payments on the mortgages, what government money was used to bail out
mortgages.
Sophisticated attorneys
with years of complex litigation and legal experience are perplexed by
the inability of Plaintiffs to answer the most basic questions about
litigation.
Experienced circuit court
judges with decades of trial court, evidentiary and complex
litigation experience have started to ask real questions about the
millions of dollars in foreclosure judgments they’re signing every day
in their courtrooms to entities that they cannot identify.
Federal
judges with hundreds of years of experience are really starting to
dig into documents filed and representations made by the parties that
appear before them… There are real questions being raised in
bankruptcy courts and even bigger questions about fraud and collusion
and federal crimes at the highest levels of American businesses.
Thrown
into all these questions are some thought provoking comments and
research from a subscriber to this blog, like I said, it’s a bit
beyond me now, but consider his words…
From their reader...
The best way to prove this mess all got dissolved is to go to the IRS.gov website and
look for the publication # 938 for 2006 through the present. This
is where you will see that the gain on sale reporting etc all stopped
as the securitization machine was turned off temporarily in late
2007.
The trusts were all named and reporting until the end of 07 then 08 is missing??????
They
restart the reporting in 09 but it is down to only
Ginnie/Freddie/Fannie/JPM/Citi and random trusts that have been
created. The government absolutely knows what happened yet seems to
help cover this up thinking we are too dumb to catch it.
2009 reported in 2010
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p938.pdf
2008? is missing and reverts to the 2009 file?? Don’t believe me. try it.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p938–2009.pdf
2007 reported in 2008
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p938–2007.pdf
4closureFraud Note:
By taking a look at the IRS.gov index of /pub/irs-prior/ , which is completely open, http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/
it lists all of the #p938 publications from 1996 - 2009 (control f p938
to jump directly) and there is no 2008 to be found in the entire
directory...
Hmmm...
Back to my colleague's reader...
They
seriously think we are that stupid. What are they hiding from us?
Maybe that the banks have committed billions upon billions in tax
evasion. Follow what is happening in non-judicial states and you will
see the arrogance. They actually show us the blank note endorsement
from the original lender yet no recording of the interest through the
depositor to the trust. Lack of standing?
Then
when they are finished stealing the house they sell the loan from
the unlawful foreclosing party (trust) that had no standing to F/C
back to the trust through a POA to the servicer and effectively cover
their tracks that the loan was never in the trust, they still stole
the investors money, and they still claimed the tax exemptions under
REMIC.
All while the Govt and IRS watch.
Look
at the WAMU BK. They were found to have a 10.3 Billion dollar tax
claim filed against them that was reduced to 33M yet Chase got to
walk away with a 300 Billion dollar bank 200M in mortgages for
1.9Billion. The loans were shown to have been written down to $0 yet
they still want to collect?
Along with the Pub 938 you can review Pub 550 that explains the tax exemptions etc for the REMIC trusts.
No
assignments were done as required, no “true and absolute sales under
FASB 140″ were ever perfected, No standing has ever been established
for most or all of the securitization trusts.
This is the biggest RICO case on earth.
Oh, and maybe we should review who funded LPS… JPM/BOA/Wachovia when they split off of FIS in 2008.
4closureFraud here...
Some pretty deep stuff...
I have not been able to figure this all out since June even after asking all my contacts to help me out.
So up until now, I have come up with a big fat Zero on this.
So, since I ended up at zero, why not turn it over to the Zero Hedge readers to help me figure this out...
I may be totally off on this, and it may be a "nothing burger", but I think there is something here that is very significant.
Looks very suspicious to me, but again, this is way above my area of expertise.
If this is a "nothing burger" , and I am "overreacting", I am ready to take my lashings.
But if it isnt???
Thoughts?
~
4closureFraud.org
And as always, check out 4closureFraud.org for daily updates on the Foreclosure Fraud (global) crisis that affects everyone...
»
- advertisements -
Gee, isn't Turbo Tax Cheat Timothy Geithner the top USTreasury man? Send the banksters to jail.
End the FED.
The irony of it all: we are not federal employees so we don't need to file form 1040, but Turbo Timmy is a federal employee.
You can get it here:
http://moneyonaccount.com/downloads/RedemptionByMethod/CUSIP/p938--2008.pdf
People seem to forget that most foreclosures happend when the government was the mayor stockholder for bankstocks.
SO
This mistake is a US GOV mistake.
Also, why would a US GOV company pay taxes to the US GOV?
The first 2 banks that will benefit will be CITI AND BANK OF AMERICA.
I'm going long monday.
if you're talking "state and local government" then i think you're on to something. so let's talk "Senators/Congressmen and Presidents" relative to QE 2 and start asking "who gets the cabbage" because clearly "not everyone gets bailed out here" and "if done wrong nobody does." And "we are talking trillions" and "if Paul Krugman is to be believed 10 trillion dollars."
You do know, 87.5% of all Stimulus Funds went to foreign governments correct?.
You also are aware near 1 Trillion of QE 1 is still sitting, unused, and so,why do we need QE 2?.
Food for thought.
Don't forget the $700 billion TARP.
CONgress: "where did the $500 billion go?"
Bernanke: "foreign banks..."
Great stuff.
I'm considering the following:
Take out a home equity loan of about $20,000.
Then, cash out my IRA's and 401K's to pay my mortgage down to about $10,000 and then do a strategic default.
Leave the taxes on the IRA and 401K withdrawals unpaid and let the IRS come after me.
Then let the IRS and the two banks fight about who owns what.
Bet they'd just kill me Capone style, bury my body in the desert, and rent the house for a couple years until they cram the robo-foreclosures through and get TARP II.
When organized crime runs the Financial Industry and the Government you really are screwed.
No need to do all that, just discharge your debt under the Uniform Commercial Code.
File a UCC 1 form claiming yourself as the CREDITOR with a security interest in all the assets, debts, body, marriage, children, and liens of you yourself, the DEBTOR. You must fill it out correctly. This gives you the status to manage your commercial affairs.
Then, you are a Transmitting Utility and you can discharge debt to a fake debt-based fiat money loan. It's really easy to do.
See the UCC posted at the Cornell Law University website.
BTW, legislation may pass to nationalize all private IRAs and 401ks in the US.
BTW, legislation may pass to nationalize all private IRAs and 401ks in the US.
Yes, so we know, I presume(if it were to)they think this will not start a civil war?.
If they do not, then they truly deserve what they get.
Screw me once, shame on you, screw me twice, shame on ME.
Any timeline set?,( I have not read of one,hust that meetings on it were held Again, Sept 15-16th) or are they still just discussing it?,they want to do it they had better do it before Nov 3..................
Looking at Argentina and Greece precedence, but have no idea if or when...
your sensationalism is not nearly as good as mine. i like your spirit, tho.
Thanks, doolittle. It sounds like you've got some inside scratch...
Well, if it's a nothing-burger, some people are getting pretty fat off it.
FOLLOW THE MONEY. It leaves trails and tells tails! Only "cash" in the form of FRNs can be hidden in closets, only to eventually surface and start telling tails also. Where is the money? Who owns that money? How did it get there? Who paid it? Who received it? At each step in the "hide the proceeds" process there are people who are complicit and are guilty.
Foremost of all - where are the indictments?
This may be totally off, but here goes. A). Since the original CDO's were sold prior to the crash. And B). Since most of the CDO's in possession were purchased from another provider. (BOFA sold to WaMu ect. And the purchaser bought near par. And C). There was a period between the crash in value of the CDO's and the bailouts. (mark to market confusion). Therefore: profits for the creation of the CDO's should have finished reporting by 2008, and the purchase of CDO's at the height of the bubble minus the government buyout at par was probably near zero. So why are the banks foreclosing? Because as the sellers and servicers of the original CDO's, they have the responsibility of collecting the interest and principal for the tranche owners and to foreclose and transfer the liquidation value in the event of a default. (Mostly to our government now.) Sorry, but unless I'm missing something or mistaken, you don't have a case here for RICO.
again "you all are throwing words around like fraud and defraud" like they have meaning. YOU HAVE TO PROVE INTENT. Without that you have nothing. We have elections....ergo we already know we have fraud.
Prove intent?
Ignorance is no excuse. If someone asks me a technical legal question about my citizenship status and I don't know the answer but say, "Yes, absolutely" and sign a form, I think that's "fraud" regardless of whether I had "intent" to lie or was just ignorant of what the form was asking.
If the "we didn't know we were lying" defense is gonna save anyone here, problems are going to become more serious than some bank failures or some guilty men going free, anyway.
OK. So when you filled out the voter's registration, did you check that you are a US Citizen?
Did you intend to characterize yourself as a 14th Amendment citizen with a diminished capacity to manage your commercial affairs? Did you intent to be a national of the District of Columbia, which makes you a foreign resident of one of the many states?
Do you live in the District of Columbia? If yes, then you are all square.
If you don't, did you commit fraud or lie in answering that question?
I think you're misinterpreting the context of my comment.
In a criminal court, it is often necessary to prove intent to obtain a conviction--it appeared to me that the poster I was replying to said it was necessary to prove "intent to defraud." IANL, so defer on whether that is correct or not.
MY point is this: if a bank signed documents which were backdated and signed by fictitious persons about a note which had been destroyed for a debt which had been re-assigned to ownership of multiple additional parties, I believe that a strong criminal case for "fraud" can be made against the BANK.
Without even delving into the epistemological/ontological discussion about whether a corporation can HAVE intent of any kind, the bank's potential defense of "we didn't intend to lie" is very weak indeed.
Yes and No. Since UCC Article 9 was revised, none of the notes or assignments on paper were necessary by law.
But suddenly, the court decisions collided on state procedures of establishing title and ownership assignment against the UCC laws which are adopted in every state. The states defended their interests. They wanted all those recording fees!
There is no money, and there is no debt. There's only fake money, and discharge of debt. By extension, all the documents establishing ownership and assignment are fake too. No problem for the banks to go with the trend.
But the old judges on the bench decided otherwise.
This is just a symptom of the fact that nobody owns their proprty, even if they paid off the note. When the Federal Reserve designed the debt-based monetary system in 1933, they decided no one could own property because it was not purchased with gold and silver or gold and silver backed notes. Due to the money system and the banks we have been tricked out of the allodial rights of property ownership that existed all over the US by the land patents passed by Congress in the 1800s. These land grants awarded land to the people of the US into perpetuity, and to relatives, and their assigns.
These Land patents or grants are kept in the Bureau of Land Management GLO reports.
To my knowledge, the only way to establish ownership now is for you to file the UCC 1 Financing Statement claiming yourself as the CREDITOR with a security interest in all debts, assets, liens, real property, marriage, children, driver's license of you yourself the DEBTOR. This is all written up in your Security Agreement.
Then, you can claim your right as an assign of the original land patent where your house is located. For example, a rental in Sacramento is located on a Land Patent awarded to Winston Marshall in 1861. You send the paperwork to the BLM and to the county recorder.
Reality is way different than most people imagine.
I got to this article thru the RSS reader I use for subscriptions to ZH and others.
Scanning the p938--2007.pdf vs the p938--2009.pdf, I note a few things:
1. The 2007 pub lists a lot of REMICs/CDOs with varying Startup/Issue Dates back to 2004, none older, but up through 2007. The majority are later dated, meaning more current.
2. The 2009 pub lists a lot of REMICs/CDOs with varying Startup/Issue Dates back to 2004, 2005, 2006 (only a few), mostly later dated 2007, 2008 & 2009.
Supposition: These pubs only list a given REMIC/CDO once. They do not appear to be fully inclusive, cummulative directories.
Regarding 2008, that was the credit crisis peak, securitization came to a screeching halt. That said, were there ANY created? Likely so, Fannie, Freddie, Ginnie didn't stop. But note the delayed filing dates cited in the pubs above.
I'm not a securities attorney nor do I play one on Teevee nor on the Internet, but this may not be the dog your reader thinks it is.
WTF? Denied access to edit my own post?
After clicking save I see the 2008 pub was located.
Locked out here too. They were doing work at midnight eastern this morning.
EDIT: It's working again.
See my comment above. The 2008 one is found, it's not a conspiracy (yet).
Thanks for digging it up. Why is wasn't on the IRS website does raise eyebrows.
The banks' failure to file taxes occurs at every step of making loans. The banks don't lend their money or credit, they access YOUR credit and bring it into the bank.
Through fractional banking they leverage up your credit 9x and make more loans. The earnings on the 9x are supposed to be reported on the 1099OID forms to the IRS. They never do report and pay the tax.
I doesn't surprise me that during the securitization, they have the IRS 938 forms to submit. They don't file their taxes at any point.
They withhold your credit and present you with a promissory note to make you promise to pay back your credit plus interest for the life of the loan. This is the loan we are tricked into believing we received. Since the bank has no consideration in the contract, they have no right to collateralize or demand payment for the loan. The contract was a fraud to begin with.
Then, after 3 years they can file the 1099A Abandonment of credit form with your name on it stating that you abandoned your credit with them. The fact is you had no idea you received credit at the time of signing the loan application. The banks succeed in stealing your credit 3 years later.
This is well known by all regulators and government. Even the CPAs know what is going on. But my CPA stated that the taxes to be paid were so miniscule in relation to the tax return of the banks that it would not be prosecuted. This is particularly so if only a few people report to the IRS that the taxes on their transactions were not paid. Just a drop in the bucket.
So now that the MBS investors found out 938 tax filings were not done, we might get some action. But what about all the 1099OIDs not filed? What about all the credit stolen by the banks at the same time?
All of these revelations are obviously debt bombs intent on destroying the banking system. What you don't hear about in the MSM or anywhere is the process of discharge of debt under the Uniform Commercial Code. My new favorite meme is: There is no money, and there is no debt. There's only fiat money and the discharge of debt.
We live in a debt-based monetary system, but no one examines the implications. If you sign a contract for fiat money, you discharge debt with more fake money in the form of a transfer instrument that you write yourself. Under the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC), we the people are defined as Transmitting Utilities. We create debt-based money with our signatures.
Go look at form Standard Form SF5510 in the GSA forms library and read the instructions to the bank. This form is used to process a non-cash discharge of debt through the US Treasury. When is it going to be on the news?
I'm writing an article on the Asymmetric Warfare in the Mortgage Loan mill and Foreclosure mill wars. Where is the Contract Fraud Letter mill and a Discharge of Debt mill to counter their claims for the little guy?
kayl,
"The banks' failure to file taxes occurs at every step of making loans. The banks don't lend their money or credit, they access YOUR credit and bring it into the bank.
Through fractional banking they leverage up your credit 9x and make more loans. The earnings on the 9x are supposed to be reported on the 1099OID forms to the IRS. They never do report and pay the tax."
Question?,( loved your posts BTW,makes total sense, and I always knew I was not a REAL PERSON to the Bank),that said.
How does this same Frac Reserve 9-1, apply to your FRN's on Deposit in that bank, or any other Bank for that matter?.
They leverage OUR deposits 9-1, and loan it out at that rate, and YET once agin, collect interest on FRN's,that do not belong to them.
Why are we not paid 9-1 on their USE of our Deposits?.
And why would they not pay TAXES on those 9-1 leveraged loans.
There are two kinds of debt-based money, but it's been a while since the research so I'm shaky on the correct title. Someone help me here. Money of account (credit money) and debt-notes that we hold in our checking accounts. The latter are the FRNs.
These monies do not mix. We are the principals and owners of the credit and the proceeds derived thereof. The UCC process to get back the money they made off of our credit is called Recoupment. You must file a UCC 1 Financing Statement to have the status to manage your own commercial affairs.
These UCC laws are so arcane, I don't have a quick fire procedure for recoupment right now. But I have glanced at the description in Article 3 of the UCC.
They are supposed to pay the taxes by filing a 1099OID.
great posts. nothing happens obviously until someone is arrested and it would have to be someone within the government itself. in the meantime "the trains are rolling" and everyone should leave it at that.
That's it. Been paying attention to this for a couple of months and am pulling the plug. Instructions to the wife... Take the mortgage payment money into an account and we will purchase gold as a hedge until this staightens out. Heck, with the way gold is moving I will probably be able to pay off the debt in the next year once QE12 kicks in.
Write a letter to the bank complaining of the fraud against you. It must be in the Affidavit form.
Write you thought the bank was lending you its money or credit. You didn't know that the bank actually accessed YOUR credit at the US Treasury.
Write that the bank did not disclose the material terms and conditions of the loan.
Write that the bank has no consideration in the contract.
Write that the bank withheld your credit. They took your credit and leveraged it 9x. Then, they moved you on into signing a promissory note having you promise to pay back your credit with interest over the life of the loan.
In a debt-based monetary system, you cannot pay a debt-- you can only discharge it.
Three years later, the bank filed a 1099A form claiming you abandoned your credit without your knowledge and consent. You didn't even know that the bank was holding your credit.
Write that the bank failed to file a 1099OID form reporting the tax it owed on the new money it created with your credit.
You should inform the bank that they do not manage your commercial affairs. You rescind your signature on the loan for cause, failure to disclose the material terms and conditions of the loan.
Instruct the bank that you will discharge your debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Once you send the bank and the Office of the Comptroller of the currency this letter, you have broken the presumption that the bank is a tax collector on your account. This concept is clear once you understand that all of your life's productivity was claimed by the Federal Reserve and IMF bank with your birth certificate. And any money you pay for any goods or services is a 100% tax on your income.
Then, you must go through the procedure of discharging your debt. It requires three pieces of paper: the presentment, the payment bond, and the surety or promise to pay.
The presentment is a valid claim, a letter that says you owe a total amount of money on the mortgage. Write "Accepted for Value and Returned for Discharge, Settlement, and Closure of the Account" on a blank spot on the bill.
The payment bond is a 3-party check with You, Timothy Geithner the Secretary of the Treasury, and the bank needing payment. It must be in the form of an international money order. The names and addresses of all three parties must be printed on the front. Write Pay to the Order of, the Bank's Name followed by the amount in numbers, and the amount written in letters. Sign the money order, and write agent after your name. If you read the UCC diligently you will see that this is agency in the signature of a Transmitting Utility.
The surety bond is a promise to pay. You can use a 1040V voucher and fill it out with your social security number. It instructs the Treasury to use the credit in your exemption account and process a non-cash discharge of debt for the bank.
Download the Standard Form SF5510 at the GSA website. This form is a Authorized Agreement for the Pre-authorized Payments. It informs Treasury that you are setting up a non-cash discharge for the bank. Make copies of your pages.
Send the original presentment to the Treasury with the words "Accepted for Value.." on it. The presentment must be a valid claim. And send all the other pages first to the Treasury. Then, send the copies to the bank.
This is the procedure to discharge debt. You must read about the debt-based monetary system by reading Modern Money Mechanics posted at the Federal Reserve, and read everything about the Uniform Commercial Code at the Cornell Law University website. I also read an online book by Mary Elizabeth Croft How I clobbered every cash confiscatory agency. She is a bit dingy, but her description of the debt-based monetary system is accurate. I also liked her quotes.
Please understand that the PTB have created an entirely new vocabulary that blocks the average individual from understanding what is going on. For example, a "person" is defined as a corporate fiction in the law. To us it is just some guy. Get a copy of Black's Law dictionary 4 or 5 version to decode the meaning of transmitting utility, person, name, and so on.
Discharge of debt is the law under the UCC, be a good citizen and discharge your debt.
You may be technically correct, I have no idea. But legal mumbo jumbo only works for the empowerd class. We have no mojo, so legal mumbo jumbo won't work for us. Try that and you'll lose your house.
I believe we should follow the law and discharge our debts like all good Transmitting Utilities.
Ultimately, however, you can't beat a criminal cartel.
Interesting process. I am trying to distill it. Does this mean that if I discharge my debt in the way you describe, then I don't need to continue to pay off my loans? If true, then I'm on it.
You've got to understand this process thoroughly. And yes, it does work. It's the law.
I filed the UCC 1 form first and then discharged the debt on a foreclosure.
Read my other posts.
It would be very cool of you to post a file containing all the forms and perhaps even fill-in-the-blank versions of the ones you successfully used, for those who would like to go with this program.
Bottom line: either the trust is exempt from taxation and therefore "true sale" assignnments are genuine (but where are then the Notes?) or the banks have, already, screwed the IRS and are now trying to screw the borrowers. Now about the possibility that politicians will try and protect the borrowers I have absolutely no faith in, I do , rather I MUST have faith in the fact that the IRS will make the banks pay for.
Found it. Isn't this it? (I agree it's not in the IRS directory, but I believe it's here) Now the question is, is this the only copy of it on this "Uncle Fed" domain? Get it while you can!
Reading the actual PDF, here is the 2008 list of REMIC's. Read the top of page 3.
First quarter 2008: http://www.unclefed.com/IRS-Forms/2007/p938.pdf
First quarter 2007: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p938--2007.pdf
First quarter 2009: http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-prior/p938--2009.pdf
OGW, you the man! You have mad skilz. Can you tell us how the retrieved 2008 document fits into the larger question here and whether it does so in a favorable way?
Well, I knew James Brown could belt out a tune, but this is ridiculous.
Actually, that sort of makes the mystery deepen even more. Why was the form (apparently) removed from the www.irs.gov/pub... website? It's available at this "Uncle Fed's Tax Board" website who, presumedly, obtained it at some point from the www.irs.gov site.... why is it no longer there?
100% correct. Which is why people should be copying that 2008 .PDF before that one "disappears".
Of course the IRS could have just missplaced it too.
I too would love to read some ZH comments on this subject, perhaps a guest post on the main page? I have absolutely no expertise in this area but I agree with 4ClosureFraud's opinion that something smells awfully fishy here.
The ommission concerning the 2008 year is probably a mistake or oversight, as the basic rules have not changed in recent years. The rules concerning Publication 938 are described in Treasury Regulation § 1.6049-7 Returns of information with respect to REMIC regular interests and collateralized debt obligations.
Much more unsettling is the fact that if the REMIC doesn't have a clear chain of title to the mortgage, the REMIC loses all of its tax advantages. Check out Treasury Regulaton § 1.593-11 Qualifying real property loan and nonqualifying loan defined:
(2) Meaning of secured. A loan will be considered as secured only if the loan is on the security of any instrument (such as a mortgage, deed of trust, or land contract) which makes the interest of the debtor in the property described therein specific security for the payment of the loan, provided that such instrument is of such a nature that, in the event of default, the property could be subjected to the satisfaction of the loan with the same priority as a mortgage or deed of trust in the jurisdiction in which the property is situated.Or to put this in simple terms, REMIC holders own a big "nothing burger". It looks impressive, but has no calories.
Probably Obama or Congress will just have to change the law by fiat before the whole home mortgage system comes to a complete halt.
MERS, INC., APPELLANT, VS. SOUTHWEST HOMES OF ARKANSAS, APPELLEE
SEPTEMBER 23, 2009
MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM, INC., APPELLANT, VS. SOUTHWEST HOMES OF ARKANSAS, APPELLEE
No. 08-1299
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS
2009 Ark. LEXIS 121
March 19, 2009, Opinion Delivered
Further, under Arkansas foreclosure law, a deed of trust is defined as “a deed conveying real property in trust to secure the performance of an obligation of the grantor or any other person named in the deed to a beneficiary and conferring upon the trustee a power of sale for breach of an obligation of the grantor contained in the deed of trust.” Ark. Code Ann. § 18-50-101(2) (Repl. 2003). Thus, under the statutes, and under the common law noted above, a deed of trust grants to the trustee the powers MERS purports to hold. Those powers were held by East as trustee. Those powers were not conveyed to MERS.
MERS holds no authority to act as an agent and holds no property interest in the mortgaged land. It is not a necessary party. In [*11] this dispute over foreclosure on the subject real property under the mortgage and the deed of trust, complete relief may be granted whether or not MERS is a party. MERS has no interest to protect. It simply was not a necessary party. See Ark. R. Civ. P. 19(a). MERS’s role in this transaction casts no light on the contractual issues on appeal in this case. See, e.g., Wilmans v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 355 Ark. 668, 144 S.W.3d 245 (2004).
Finally, we note that Arkansas is a recording state. Notice of transactions in real property is provided by recording. See Ark. Code Ann. § 14-15-404 (Supp. 2007). Southwest is entitled to rely upon what is filed of record. In the present case, MERS was at best the agent of the lender. The only recorded document provides notice that Pulaski Mortgage is the lender and, therefore, MERS’s principal. MERS asserts Pulaski Mortgage is not its principal. Yet no other lender recorded its interest as an assignee of Pulaski Mortgage. Permitting an agent such as MERS purports to be to step in and act without a recorded lender directing its action would wreak havoc on notice in this state.
Affirmed.
http://foreclosuredefensenationwide.com/?page_id=161
I'm pretty sure they will.
1 little piece of paper or another financial meltdown.
take your pick.
And let's not forget that the people who got kicked out DIDN'T pay their bills. And because the law is always on the side of people who have the money, this is a no brainer.
4closureFraud, keep digging here & along the side channels of the rabbit hole. There's likely much more here than meets the eye of the media. In the mean time, the first indictment is out for a former Bank of America manager (posted earlier in comment 655039).
http://7thspace.com/headlines/360304/massachusetts_bank_branch_manager_charged_in_mortgage_scam.html
This story may turn out to be the biggest story of the 21st century as the collusion between the banks & the gov't is exposed.
well well well....bank fraud to inflate the price of houses...who would have thunk? typical bank shit...inflate the hell out of something and then take the cookie jar away[raise interest rates]. this is exactly what my grandfather told us about the bankers during the great prozac period of the thirties. take everything from factories to farms. the last to go were the farms...the vast majority of farms had no lien or mortgage...however, drive the price of farm commodities down on the chicago board and you can then show up at the tax auction and buy hundreds of square miles of farm land for sub pennies on the dollar, since the farmer could not even earn enough to pay his property taxes! somethings never change only the names have changed.
"And I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property -- until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered... The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." -- Thomas Jefferson wrote on May 28, 1816