This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
The Clusterfuck Is Complete: Meet Those Most Hurt By The Earls' Squatting: Conejo Capital Partners... And Soon Millions Of Other "Soon To Be Ex" Home-Buyers
By now the 30 minutes of media fame of the Simi Valley's most (in)famous squatters - the Earls is running out. Yet the consequences of the their actions will resound for a long, long time. The victims: all those may have bought a house in a foreclosure auction, or any other form of existing property sale, without a "lis pendens" or other form of pre-existing legal action, will suddenly think twice about purchasing a home from a bank, or any other owner who may have had a mortgage on the property (now in MERS limbo), and simply end up unwinding the sale. The reason, as Conejo Capital Partners notes, is that nobody will now know when some other set of squatters, who may have owed as much as the Earls (almost a million), and did not contest their loan in good standing with a bank, decide to take the law into their own hands and move right back in. "The most innocent of all victims in this situation
are the new buyers who had signed a contract to purchase the Mustang
property. They are a family of 4 who are adopting their first child this
month. They had already funded their loan, spent money on appraisals,
given notice at their current residence and were scheduled to take
possession of 5893 Mustang Drive on Tuesday the 12th. They
have now cancelled the transaction and are scrambling to find a place to
live as they will be homeless at the end of the month. They are scared.... We
especially feel for the children who are being subjected to this, and the
new buyers who will be temporarily homeless as a result of these events. In all likelihood, there is no way for us to recover the damages we have
suffered, this is no longer about winning; it is about what is right." And the tragedy in all of this, is that there is no clear guily party, as everyone is to blame: the banks, for rushing on the original sale to rake up the NINJA fees, the foreclosure "experts" for robosigning to accumulate the lowest possible cost basis on the subsequent MBS resale for the mortgage servicer, and the squatters, for deciding to take the law into their own hands, when suddenly there is no law. One thing is certain, this incident will propagate and will make existing home sale next to impossible. And yes, inventory will accumulate, but demand will plunge, resulting in a total collapse of the supply-demand equilibrium point, better known to those idiots a/k/a economic Ph.Ds, as price. But that is precisely what happens when in the pursut of material gains, by everyone, the rule of law is now completely trampled in the USA.
The following from Conejo Capital Partners is a must read, for a full perspective on the other side of the Earls' story. Because there always is an alterantive point of view.
OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM CONEJO CAPITAL PARTNERS LLC REGARDING THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 5893 MUSTANG DRIVE, SIMI VALLEY CA:
October 15, 2010
Given the extraordinary and illegal events orchestrated by the former homeowners and their attorney, we now feel compelled to share the facts regarding 5893 Mustang Drive.
On January 28, 2010 the property was sold thru a public auction at the trustee sale held at the Ventura County Court House. Each month this same process occurs thousands of times across the nation as a method for banks to take back or dispose of the property that is not being paid for. Conejo Capital was the “successful” bidder. Shortly thereafter the former bank issued the title and it was legally recorded with Conejo Capital Partners LLC as the new owner of the property. At the time all we knew about the property was that the former homeowners purchased it in 2001 for $539,000, and that they later refinanced it, pulling equity out, resulting in debt of roughly $1,000,000. No “lis pendens” had been recorded indicating any disagreement or legal action pending regarding the property. Had they done so before the auction, we would not have purchased this property.
After purchasing the property we found it to be occupied by the former home owners, Jim & Danielle Earl. We were able to make contact with them and tried to understand their situation. They expressed their opinion that they had been unlawfully foreclosed on by the bank. Yet to our knowledge, the Earls had not initiated a lawsuit against any bank at that time, and as far as we know even today there is no pending lawsuit against any bank. Any grievance they had would have been with their bank, not Conejo Capital Partners. We tried to amicably discuss terms of a possible agreement which would have helped them make a comfortable transition but they were unwilling. They gave us no choice other than having to start an action against them to gain physical possession of the property.
The unlawful detainer action (eviction trial) is something that normally takes roughly a month to complete, but they stretched it out to almost 6 months by filing two bankruptcies. The first one was dismissed due to their failure to file the proper paper work and the second was probably dismissed as well. At the unlawful detainer trial, the judge thoroughly reviewed all of the facts of the case and ruled in favor of Conejo Capital Partners LLC and ordered the Earl’s to vacate the property. We were also awarded a monetary judgment in the amount of just over $27,000 (fair market rental value for the time they illegally occupied the property). The Earls appealed the decision but their appeal was dismissed by the court because they failed to pay the court its required appellate costs. The Earls’ attorney sent us threatening correspondence and amazingly described his plan to a federal court judge in San Francisco that he planned to undertake “self help” to retake possession of the Mustang property illegally. The federal judge denied their motion for an injunction and ruled that the "Plaintiffs have offered no authority in support of this extraordinary concept (of “self help" seizure of the Mustang property).
On July 2, 2010 the Ventura County Sheriff and an agent of ours went to the property to complete the court-ordered eviction. There, they found that the Earls had departed but (based upon their attorney’s advice), the Earls left all of the personal belongings, in the Mustang house including all of their furniture, cars and the family dog. This extraordinary tactic caused us another 2 week delay because we were forced to follow the legal guidelines in dealing with the situation. The Earls contacted us at the very last minute before we would have had legal right to dispose of the property and we allowed them to retrieve it at no additional cost to them.
Once we had gained possession of the Mustang Property, we spent a considerable amount of money remodeling it. When the remodeling was complete, we put it on the market for sale. We secured a buyer and were scheduled to close escrow on Monday October 11th. On Saturday October 9th the Earls and their attorney followed thru with their previous threats and took the law into their own hands. They hired a locksmith to break into the Mustang home. They had arranged to have t.v. news cameras filming their actions, and then proceeded to hold a press conference stating that they were within their rights and that we (Conejo Capital Partners) had somehow violated the law. All along the Simi Valley Police Department sat idle and refused to get involved no matter how much proof was offered supporting our legal rights and position. We were told that we needed to resolve it in front of a judge even though it had already been decided. In the days immediately following, the same attorney has done this again in Escondido and Newport Beach (the latter time both the attorney and his clients were arrested). It is amazing that this can happen in a nation founded on and based upon law. It is truly sad that all across America so many people claim to be the “victim” rather than taking personal responsibility for their actions.
It needs to be noted that Conejo Capital Partners LLC did not take the home from the Earls, their bank did. We simply purchased the home from the bank in a legal manner and then had to deal with the situation that had been created. Conejo Capital Parnters LLC is not a large Wall Street bank, we represent a group of regular people who are hard working citizens that pay their bills and abide by the law. We have approached the Earls on many occasions in an attempt to see if we could find an amicable resolution but in each case have been denied. We offered to waive our monetary judgment in simple exchange for confidence that we wouldn’t find ourselves wrapped up in litigation that ultimately results in everyone losing. Although the former homeowner had roughly $1,000,000 in debt against the home, both they and their attorney have said in recent interviews that they feel like they don’t owe anything and in fact are owed damages as well.
The Earls’ attorney announced proudly that he “chose” the Earls because he needed to protect the new buyers from being defrauded by us. It is extremely unfortunate that he is putting others in jeopardy as a way to create notoriety for himself. The facts about Mr. Pines life are well documented and we urge you to do your homework on him and decide about his motives for yourself.
The most innocent of all victims in this situation are the new buyers who had signed a contract to purchase the Mustang property. They are a family of 4 who are adopting their first child this month. They had already funded their loan, spent money on appraisals, given notice at their current residence and were scheduled to take possession of 5893 Mustang Drive on Tuesday the 12th. They have now cancelled the transaction and are scrambling to find a place to live as they will be homeless at the end of the month. They are scared.
This is a terribly unfortunate situation to be involved in, one that we wouldn’t wish for anyone to experience. We especially feel for the children who are being subjected to this, and the new buyers who will be temporarily homeless as a result of these events. In all likelihood, there is no way for us to recover the damages we have suffered, this is no longer about winning; it is about what is right. We didn’t ask for a fight; it was brought to us. Now with no other options, we feel compelled to do everything in our power without regard to cost or time to protect ourselves and insure this does not happen to others.
Conejo Capital Partners LLC
h/t Robert
»
- 23842 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
canejo capital.....aprox. revenue $120,000 with a total of 2 employees......run out of their home in thousand oaks, ca.
"canejo capital.....aprox. revenue $120,000 with a total of 2 employees......run out of their home in thousand oaks, ca."
Thank you for your reply.
If this information is accurate, Tyler, please belay my request for a full investigative report.
Your position on Carnejo Capital (Taco Money?) is flavored with the salt of personal vendetta.
Did you get burned by them in some way? What real information do you have on them?
No - he forget to sprinkle it with ones.
GOLD, BITCHES !!1!1
Ignore the junkers. I haven't seen one person here who is upset at the Earls who was familiar with their side of the story. But I've seen a lot of people repeating the Banks' press releases. Tyler included, apparently.
One myth is that they gave birth to 9 kids. Nope. Most of these are adopted or from foster care. And they claim to have raised 45 adopted/fostered kids.
Another claim is that they are deadbeats. Apparently not, as they tried for a long time to pay and get current, ending up paying over $100,000 to do so.
And it appears that the foreclosure documents may be fraudulent. In particular, that they weren't served notice,.but the Bank says they did.
If these actions are true, then the Banks can take your House away from you at any time, with no recourse on your part. That's what the real story is here. And it's a pity that some would rather ignore this.
"Another claim is that they are deadbeats."
at a minimum they are financially irresponsible
paid $539K in 2001 - by 2010 had at least $880K in debt against the house
that means they pulled at least $38K/year out of the house
they lived off of the house for 9 years and now claim they don't owe a penny
"One myth is that they gave birth to 9 kids. Nope. Most of these are adopted or from foster care. And they claim to have raised 45 adopted/fostered kids."
there are many forms of obsessive-compulsive behavior - some people collect beanie babies, others collect human babies - bottom line is that they were financially unable to support their OCD habit (based on the need to pull $38K/year from the house) - now we get to support them via our tax dollars - if they had spent the money on a drug habit would you still feel sorry for them?
It is hard at this point to know the merits of the situation in full. However, as to the noble Earls who are raising so many foster kids--has anyone realized that the state pays well for foster care? And the fact that the Earls may have raised very many foster kids indeed raises at least the question whether they have been adept at gaming the system for foster care payments all along. It is at least worth investigating.
Just wondering...
How long before we find out, now that a light is shining brightly on the Earls, that they bilked the state out of foster-child monies?
Give it enough time, Wimpy, and there will be claims that the Earls murdered the parents of the children so they could adopt them.
very good point!
... at a minimum they are financially irresponsible ...
This statement implies that everyone had perfect foreknowledge. Henry Paulson's urgent demand for money from congress to prevent the world from collapsing suggests that even the financial wizards didn't see the future coming that we ended up with.
The Earls were co-owners of a business. Business fell off. Income sagged. They did what they needed to do to keep going. If they alone, out of all the financial geniuses, could have foretold that the housing market was going to collapse in the manner it did, I'm sure they would have sold the house rather than pulling money out of it so they could keep going.
You could make a case that the Earls bet wrong on which way they economy and housing market were headed and how long it would take to recover. I doubt that you could make the case that they were financially irresponsible.
"The Earls did not make payments on their mortgage payment."
Wrong I think.
They did make payments.
The lender was unable to provide an accounting of those payments.
No worries, congress will legalize bank stupidity, ex post facto. POTUS vetoed it the first time, but he'll come around.
Yes, that's all that really needs to be said here.
Ok, one note here:
The Entity that originated the loan has no standing to foreclose if they do not own the loan anymore. I see you cover that later, but I didn't follow this logic at the beginning...and no I did not junk you. It appears I might be the only one who didn't .
what an angry little tyrant you are, samsterns. grow up, infant. did your mummy not give you enough spankings?
I junked you because I too want to join in the clusterfuck in some small and meaningless way.
Oh, you already have. ;-)
+10
This all makes sense to me. No idea why people are junking you.
+QE2
Sheesh, you couldn't settle for something large, but conceivable like "google" or "googleplex" could you? No you had to invoke QE2! Why not just jump to infinity.
Well QE2^QE2 to you.
Well QE2^QE2 to you
A reference picture:
http://i49.tinypic.com/f1gnl1.jpg
My fave!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnX-D4kkPOQ
The Earl's are SOL. Their ambulance chasing attorney got them on prime time. That is all that happened. We are talking about RE that was sold TWICE before the Earl's re-appeared on the scene - squatting like hobos. There is no chance of recision. In fact the Earls will be held liable for the time taken to re-house the real owners - if they are allowed to close. Nice work foster parents. I am a RE junkie. The KINK in RE are these kinds of small potato dirty deals. They're fun and funny. I disagree with the premise that it will make buying more difficult. It will demonstrate how much of the wild west America still has and the hot money that was going into physical will start doing more coke parties with local brokers with pocket listings to start a crew to jump these sharks. The Chinese are already there. If the Earl's had such a rock hard claim, why did they leave and allow the sale to pass. Even if the foreclosure was "wrong" the best they can get is "damages" calculated how? - they did get the money after all.
The original buyer of the home is the original owner, not the owner after foreclosure.
First, the banks don't lend their money. They access YOUR credit in your exemption (credit) account at the Treasury. Under the Uniform Commercial Code, the principal is the owner of his own credit.
Second, the banks withhold your credit. When you sign the loan application, the application is presented to the overnight lending window at the Fed and the bank gets your credit. But they don't tell you. They lead you into signing another set of papers, the promissory note. This makes you promise to pay them back for YOUR credit plus interest for the life of the loan. In addition, they make you agree to put up the home as collateral for the loan.
The characteristics of contract are: Offer, Acceptance, Intention, Equal consideration, Genuine consent (knowingly and willingly), Meeting of the minds, full disclosure of the terms and conditions.
The bank has no consideration in the contract. It forced unequal consideration by collateralizing the home.
The mortgage loan was a complete fraud, since the material terms and conditions of the loan were not disclosed.
The banks file a 1099A form 3 years later claiming the buyer abandoned his credit without the buyer's knowledge or consent. The banks are stealing credit at that point.
The banks take the buyer's credit and leverage it up 9x. They are required to report interest earned from these loans on a 1099OID form. They never report their taxes and are tax evaders. In fact, they have evaded taxes at every step of the loan process and avoided paying the recording fees to counties across America for the assignments in the great mortgage musical chairs game.
The buyer is the principal and owner of his credit. However, he is unfit to manage his commercial affairs if he does not file a UCC 1 Financing Statement claiming himself as the CREDITOR with a security interest in the debts, liens, real property, assets, securities, marriage, children, and body of himself the DEBTOR.
The buyer can get back the interest earned on his own credit by a process called Recoupment under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Under the UCC, the buyer is the principal and his rights are protected if he has the standing to handle his commercial affairs. Here is the rub. This part of the Uniform Commercial Code is not taught to the average individual. But you can bet that the banks are busy perfecting their liens and using other people's credit.
The banks aren't too picky on who they are defrauding. They are quite willing to sell a house twice to two different buyers even when they have no standing to sell it. They sliced and diced the mortgages into securitizations too.
The Earls have still not filed their UCC 1 Financing Statement. Either the lawyer is bringing the Earls into dishonor of the court or he's just too dumb.
The courts operate under contract law exactly like the UCC. Every court case is in fact a commercial transaction. Underlying all the BS, the court is asking for you to "pay" a bond (making you an offer), and you must always Accept for value every claim.
Remember the pattern of contracting-- Offer and Acceptance are the first two characteristics. It's the law--- you must Accept a claim and return it (1) for discharge or (2) rejected for failure to state a claim for which relief may be granted. If you do not Accept for value you are in dishonor with the court.
Fortunately, discharge of debt is very easy under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code. This is my favorite meme: There is no money, and there is no debt. There's only debt-based fiat money, and the discharge of debt.
Get it: Fake money loans are discharged with transfer instruments that you write on paper. The transfer instruments instruct the US Treasury to perform a non-cash discharge of debt through access to your exemption (credit) account at the Treasury.
So if I was the Earls I would drop that sucker lawyer of theirs that is leading them into dishonor. I would file the UCC 1 form correctly and manage my own commercial affairs. I would promptly contract with the bank to discharge the debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
Conejo has been swindled by the bank. Go figure....
fantastic post, kayl. thank you.
kayl took the time YESTERDAY to explain this entire fiasco.
And how it applies TO EVERYONE.
I suggest, (if it's ok with kayl/Tyler), that the entire process he/she explained be cut & pasted into Word.
And printed for POSSIBLE future use.I have a feeling either some here, or friends of those here NEED to know the details of this SHIT.
And how to combat getting screwed,YOU can't beat the SYSTEM?, LOL.
Appears you can , if you know the RULES.
Awesome Kayl.
Do you understand the relationship between the UCC and Maritime law?
Can you point me to some place I can read about it?
Thanks,
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Common Law was the law on the land in England for centuries.
Maritime Law was the law of the sea.
UCC is a law incorporating both bodies, but specifically prohibiting Common Law in certain areas. It's common law, maritime law, and corporate law overtaking us.
The Erie Railroad vs Tompkins case of 1938 determined that there is no general common law on the federal level. This was the turning point for common law in the US.
Look up the meaning of Prejudice or Without Prejudice under Article 2. Without Prejudice means you want to adjudicate an issue in relation to Common Law unless it is prohibited.
I obtained and read the book: "Jurisdiction and Practice of the Law of Admiralty" by John E. Hall, it's based on "Clerk's Praxis". This is an historical description of the bond system under King Edward I.
All of our contacts with people and businesses and proceedings in the court are commercial transactions. Let me give you a little example that has gone on with the city garbage company. I own a warehouse that is empty. Some time in 2006 a trash container showed up in front of the building. I had no need of trash service and didn't request any. I pulled the trash container into the courtyard, thinking the trash vendor is swapping out new trash bins in the entire neighborhood.
Two years later, the trash company sends a bill to my daughter saying that she owes $145 for trash collection. It was not answered. Then, they got my name from records and sent me the trash bill. Do I owe the trash company any money?
When I pulled the trash bin into the courtyard I was unwittingly contracting with the garbage company to collect the trash.
However, in looking at a contract there has to be the 8 characteristics: Offer, Acceptance, Intention, Equal consideration, Performance, Genuine Consent, meeting of the minds, and full disclosure of the terms and conditions of the contract.
They gave me an offer. I accepted by pulling in the garbage bin.
I had no intention of requesting garbage service.
The trash company never picked up any trash. No performance.
There was no genuine consent or meeting of the minds.
Disclosure is debatable.
So all of our encounters are matters of contract law.
What is the true law jurisdiction in courts?
I was listening to Ed Glass, a private Attorney General. He indicated that the courts are not under the Maritime Admiralty jurisdiction. As I recall, he indicated that the courts are operating under military martial law, since it was never adjourned sometime around WWII.
I did read Mary Elizabeth Croft's book "How I Clobbered every cash-confiscatory Agency..." Her quotes and description of the credit system is accurate. I liked her general description of discharge of debt, even her encounter in private chambers with a judge. I didn't like the dingy spiritual rigamaroll.
Sorry for the long wind. Hope this helps.
you have alot to say. the fact that it speaks to the magic bullet to dealing with the banksters' matrix system sounds good. too good. can you list actual cases where these maneuvers worked. or do we all end up in jail like those "income tax only applies to corporations" folks, Wesley Snipes run in with the IRS, the guy coining silver Liberty Dollars for counterfeiting, or the guy paying his employees with gold coins.
just saying, can't be that simple. even when it is, the rulings always seem to go to the cartel's benefit.
I discussed my process with my CPA. He told me it was dangerous to try and use discharge of debt when you are a little guy. I wrote a letter to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency outlining the fraud committed against me in the mortgage loan. It was in Affidavit form.
Three months later, I get a call from the CEO of the bank asking me what I wanted to get my house back. I told him I would no longer pay in FRNs, but I would discharge my debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code.
I told him to send me the final payout. He did not.
So I discharged the debt with their last statement amount and sending the 3 pieces of paper to discharge. I sent them the SF5510 form and stated that I would gladly forward their account number for the discharge to the US Treasury. I also sent them a statement of account showing the balance owed and the zero balance after discharge.
Now, the bank sends me letters for getting insurance and paying the property taxes in my name. They are using my money of account at Treasury to discharge the charges, and I sign and send them back. Accepted for Value and Returned for Discharge, Settlement, Closure of the Account.
The foreclosure was on Jan 15, 2010. Yet they affirm my ownership by using my money of account.
We need to all file UCC 1, which the bankers and creditors are doing furiously in this war of property. We need to get educated and manage our own commercial affairs. That's the bottom line for me.
What I advocate is black and white posted on the Cornell Law University website. But you should know, every state of the union has adopted the UCC. And its section numbers and some items differ from the Cornell Law posting. If you site a section in a letter to the bank, make sure to follow the link and site the section number for the state you are in.
I filed the UCC 1 last year and used my birth certificate no. as the ID number of the personal corporation. I just went to Washington State UCC online filing site yesterday. It clearly says you can't use your birth certificate no. to file the UCC 1 now. The PTB often close the door on one method or another to squeeze people out of the UCC 1 filing. I take this as an overt sign of their desperation. You must have an ID number plugged into the form to file a valid UCC 1. 25 million Americans have filed the UCC 1 form, but whether they did it correctly or not is another matter.
I've got another idea about the ID number. But if we use it and file tons and tons of UCC1 forms, eventually they will close that ID off too. This is warfare and conditions are constantly changing on the ground.
I don't know of any lawyers or others discussing Discharge of Debt and yet it is the main concern for all of us right now. This isn't theory. It is the hidden history and mechanisms of the debt-based monetary system in practice since 1933.
The UCC was developed after the war in 1945 and finalized mostly in the 50s by the National Conference of State Law Commissioners. It is in plain site, but we the people are not educated to use it properly.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6SS4ETHWQ
Thanks Kayl. Not long at all. This is the kind of stuff I spend too much time reading anyways! :-)
ORI
if true, this is a fair point. However, this fact alone, does not make Carnejo a "vulture firm" but simply foolish and subject to the consequences.
I junked you because you did not back this statement up with anything; fact or personal anecdote. are we supposed to take your word for it? please, explain, and I will perhaps 'unjunk' you. otherwise, YOU GET WHAT YOU DESERVE. sorry, its true!
perhaps a bit ot but i'm struck by the contemporaneous change in the rule of law vis a vis personal liberty during the crisis years of the war on terrorism. rule by people not by law.
only way to rule by people sanely is rule by law, just look at French revolution if you want to see rule by people without rule of law...its basically mob rules, no consistency, just whatever can get majority vote in legislature on any given day...but if people band together and say, we are not going to change contracto and property rights etc potentially everytime someone has a grievance and vote on it in the legislature, then we must democratically agree to rules that will apply to everyone, courts should be set up to decide disputes, not legislatures, and rules should be enforced equally on everyone. Rule of law.
Does Dept of Homeland Security really sound that much better than Committee of Public Safety. I believe the barbarians have already crossed the Rubicon (Seine) (Potomic) and have opened shop.
I don't mind taking things to an extreme to consider where they are going, and I'm not lacking in my criticism of US govt corruption but do you really think US as it is being operated right now is worse than "head rolling" time of the French Revolution.
My point is we must be both on guard of the tyranny of govt and also on guard of the problems with chaos and anarachy of no govt or weak govt, both at problematic states, best state is a govt responsive to people and that consistently enforces laws equally while also be forced to respect the liberties of citizens.
MM, interesting timeline of developements of the French Rev. on Wickapedia spanning about 10 years. It did not happen all at once. The old fabled frog-in-pot scenario.
thanks good point, goes to show we should not take for granted any good working govt, always be wary and vigilent for all sorts of trouble even when things seemingly smooth
MM,
Agreed, in a PERFECT world.And the one we USED to operate under.
Unfortunately, someone allowed the horses to get out of the barn,on purpose.
Money,CAN BE the ROOT of all evil..................and this is what all this is about.
I find that "Committee of Public Safety" actually sounds much more civilized than "Department of Homeland Security." Wait, what?
Am I the only one who gives a shit about the rules ?
Walter Sobchak: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WiQmQhA-OrM
If this doesn't sour people on buying houses tainted by the stench of criminal mega-banksters and fraud barons then they deserve to lose their asses.
Buzzsaw, This is the best and most honest reply on this post. I have been saying this for years. Anybody buying a house from this day forward, After reading this news, does not have my sympathy.I rent. I will always rent. I will live in my Corolla if I'm ever evicted.
plo,
Evicted?,under current Out laws the odds of being evicted are almost Nill.
No Corolla for you!.
My old 1979 Honda Accord CVCC had that faux-velour stuff on the seats. Now THAT was some comfy-ass sleeping in there! A man's Japanese subcompact is his castle.
I am angry because I now have serious doubts I will ever hold the note to my house....it really pisses me off.Real estate is fucked comprehensibly because of the greedsters.
Not that you ever own property in the US.You always have to rent it from the .gov in the form of property taxes.Thanks a lot.
Unless you are a 3rd generation rancher in Texas....then it drops off the rolls.
The complete rape of the mortgage process SHOULD result in lots of convictions....but I bet it won't...they will change the laws, to make criminal behavior legal.
ULTRA FAIL
Old school chicago house ... ?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCKxIib4nI4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xtpi-KsMO1g&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BJoXqsJMPsM&feature=related
i hear that mix and I think of Andrew Mozilo - sitting in front of a pile of peruvian flake. dance for me, bitchez.
I don't think Dr. teeth is going to qualify for a loan anytime soon. Conejo Capital is just playing the straight man in this comedy. Sure it is easy to pick on the straight man, The Earls are just an extension of Obama politics which didn't start with Obama. Something for nothing and who cares who pays.
Exactly. Spread the wealth and grab and scam all you can.
Wrong. The Earls have been defrauded of their credit. They have the right, but don't know how to conduct their commercial affairs under the Uniform Commercial Code. Their lawyer is just bringing them into dishonor and probably charging them a sh*tload for the privilege. See my post above for the details.
And Benoit Mandelbrot died this week....
WTF.
Another great man has passed away - Maurice Allais - a great sceptic of the Euro experiment in its current manifestation and general scientific free thinker and experimentalist.
The man was special.
Fractals are special and beautiful and the truth.
In memorium:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G_GBwuYuOOs
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
There are two claims that need to be verified: 1) the bank that foreclosed on the Earls was neither the owner nor the agent of the owner of the mortgage, and; 2) the Earls were staying current on the mortgage and were making up the missed payments.
If these claims are correct, then the Earls are the most innocent of all victims in this situation.
Yes, but what about the source of funds?
Where did the money for the loan come from?
I'm not sure I get your question. The money for the loan could have originally come from the bank that foreclosed. Then that bank could have sold the mortgage to someone else, thereby recouping the money loaned to the Earls. Someone loaned the original money to the Earls and a mortgage was created, giving the owner of that mortgage the right to take the property back if the Earls didn't pay for it. The question is, who is the current owner of that mortgage? The initial claim was that the bank who foreclosed on the Earls is no longer the owner of the mortgage, nor the agent of the current owner. If that is the case, the bank had no legal standing to foreclose, and no legal standing to sell the property to Conejo Capital Partners.
It is becoming apparent that this foreclosure issue is a war being waged nationwide - those who wish to conduct business in violation of state laws versus those who wish to force the banks to honor state laws. There already have been innocent victims, and there are going to be more - as there are in any war. If the claims set forth at the beginning of my previous post are true, then the bank who foreclosed on the Earls and sold the house had no legal grounds to do so. That bank is the one who has harmed Conejo Capital Partners and the family they sold the house to, not the Earls. If the two claims are not correct, then we can blame the Earls.
Does any of that address your questions?
Good answer Richard (thanks), but ...
"There is no spoon"
as in ... the banks cannot show source of funds ... other than showing the original instrument they signed ... <- that is the source of funds (UCC).
Look up Jerry Kane (below post) ... you'll see
No. The Earls have been defrauded of their credit.
Banks don't lend money or credit. They access YOUR credit through your signature on the loan application.
They withhold your credit. They lead you on to sign a promissory note, making you promise to pay them back for YOUR credit plus interest for the life of the loan.
Three years later, the banks file a 1099A Abandonment form indicating that you abandoned your credit without your knowledge or consent. At that point, the banks steal your credit.
When they get your credit, they leverage it up 9x and make new loans through the miracle of fractional banking. They are supposed to file 1099OID forms to report the taxes they owe on the earnings. They never file their taxes and are tax evaders.
Quite rightly, I see this as a fight between states rights to collect all the recording fees and determination of property rights within the states. However, let's not forget that the UCC Article 9 revised in the late 90s does not require any physical documents to record title or assignment. And the UCC Article 9 is adopted by every state.
Under the UCC, the Earls are the principals and owners of their own credit. However, they haven't filed the UCC 1 Financing Statement claiming themselves as the CREDITOR with a security interest in all the liens, debts, assets, real property, marriage, children, and body and body prints of the DEBTOR. They don't have the standing to handle their own commercial affairs.
If they filed, they would restore all their rights under the UCC. The lawyer is just a turd leading them into dishonor with the courts. See my other posts.
This is going to turn out to be a big passion play, ideal for developing and furthering the false left/right paradigm... expect Bill O'Reilly and The View to chime in on this by Wednesday at the latest.
The banks are the ones screwing everybody, with the grandaddy of the venomous spiders being the Fed ... but they will not get focused on, just the "human interest" stuff of poor evicted people vs. the rich greedy flippers etc.
+1, great point. art of deflection.
Arrested Foreclosure Lawyer: ‘We Weren’t Trespassing’
California attorney Michael T. Pines has been quite busy. He’s been helping people break into their foreclosed homes–using a locksmith or, if necessary, by smashing a window.
But what Mr. Pines, 58 years old, considers a mission, the law labels trespassing.
Mr. Pines was arrestedWednesday as he helped Rene Zepeda, 72, break back into his foreclosed home in Newport Beach, Calif. Mr. Pines said he was charged with trespassing and vandalism; he thinks the bail was $20,000. (See a photo slideshow of the event.)
“Some of the great people in this county, the world, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, had to get arrested,” he tells Developments. “I just felt that I had to stand up for my clients.”
Mr. Pines, whose bio includes more than two decades as a lawyer and a real-estate investor and, he claims, mortgage fraud victim, says that his 70 or so clients all deserve their homes back. If they have to break in, so be it. If someone else has purchased it, that doesn’t matter. His method is an extreme answer to the questions surrounding the current crisis involving mortgage paperwork and foreclosures: Who owns the loan and who actually has the right to foreclose?
“I’m trying to teach homeowners what their rights are. In my opinion, they are the legal owners of the property. All of these foreclosures, all of these evictions are grossly unlawful,” he says. “All of the loans that are currently outstanding are grossly unlawful. Homeowners have a right to get their houses back because they were illegally stolen from them. I feel very confident in saying they have the legal right to do it.”
Earlier this week, we wrote about how Mr. Pines helped another family take back their home. In this case, Jim and Danielle Earl used a locksmith to get back into the six-bedroom house they once called home. They fell behind on their mortgage and, at the time of their eviction, they owed about $880,000 on the mortgage. An investor purchased the house at a trustee sale. The Earls maintain the home is theirs.
In the case of the Zepedas, whose 4,400-square-foot former house is now on the market for $3.8 million, a window was broken to gain entry. JP Morgan Chase says it is the owner.
The Zepedas lost the luxury home 15 months ago after not making payments on the mortgage, JP Morgan spokesman Gary Kishner tells the Register. “After two illegal break-ins and squattings in a two-week period last November, a court order was obtained and sheriffs secured the property once again,” he is quoted as saying. “Police assistance was needed … once again because of trespassing and criminal damage to the property.”
http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2010/10/15/arrested-foreclosure-lawyer...Them sounds like "good people."
Anyway, it's California, good f'ing luck finding anyone who has the right to cast the first stone.
Number one place whre people are owned by the banks- Washington D.C.
Number 2: Newport Beach, CA.
Bad choice, Mr. Pines.
These people are house debtors not homeowners. Pay cash.
"These people are house debtors not homeowners."
exactly - and they lived off the house for 9 years - turned a $539K purchase price into at least $880K in debt - like they would ever be able to pay that off and support 9 kids
+1
Yes, not just that, and all of a sudden they become heroes. What an irony.
Plus, now with this kind of publicity, they can make some money from this. Maybe this is what they want from the very beginning!
And if they cannot afford to feed those kids, why they volunteerily to adopt that many kids? And the state is very irresponsible either to let this kind of irresponsible couples to adopt any children at all, not to mention 6 of them!
+100
Intuitively correct or purposely misguided? The original people who bought these properties have been defrauded of their credit and herded into contracts wherein the material terms and conditions of the loans were not disclosed.
This sets a dangerous precedence of lawyers leading people into dishonor with the courts instead of filing the UCC 1 Financing Statement and discharging the debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code. Never trust an elf.. lawyer.
See my other posts.
Tyler, ethically, the squatters are wrong. Legally, they may be right. I have no pity for the banks (or any party that had a hand in creating this mess). Stupid is as stupid does...it doesn't matter how much money you have, if you're stupid you deserve to go down.
Stupid is as stupid does = the Earls +9 (my original point $1M in debt, and you think they could have bought some birth control....duh).
Do they deserve to go down?
I realise this third time round story is geared for outrage 'n' page hits 'n' weekend playgrounds for the posters. . .
but if you care to refer back to the previous posts, you'll learn "the Earls + 9" have three kids of their own, and six fostered/adopted kids. . .
given that the state would be paying for those kids being "parentless" one way or another, maybe a little less "outrage" is in order.
but hey, what the hell - BURN THEM ALL!!11!!!!!!
Actually it is geared at what could arguably be the most critical ethical/legal dilemma in the history of America. If it was for page hits, we would have set it up in the form of a 100 page slideshow complete with cartoons.
Ratigan should invite Cojones Capital on his show...
You mean like these?
https://www.newyorkfed.org/publications/result.cfm?comics=1
WTF ?
By dilemma, do you mean lying, cheating, and stealing... and TBTF?
This is all grey as hell. Everyone craves clear victims and villains. The point is there is no large government centralized solution. No lynch (heh heh) pin to pull, no silver bullet, no Occam's Razor with which to cut the Gordian Knot.
For me, this is what I have been waiting for all along. I thought this logistical/legal clusterfuck was going to happen when the derivatives market blew up. I was wrong, it's right here in plain sight in the MBS market. The chaos created by this may well make the derivatives unwind invisible to Joe and Josephine, their lives will already be so fucked up when it finally drops the coup de grâce.
Solutions, if that is even the right word, will be local. This is about turbulence now, everyone of us stepping through the eddys and swirls that are around us, helping or pulling under those around us, as we move forward.
Exactly. Of course, it took me a couple thousand more words in dozens of disjointed comments to say the same thing. I could take a few brevity and cohesion tips from you.
you (all) are clever enough to be aware of the language you use framing the posts, and the humans involved, and the way such language subtly manipulates the opinions expressed in your thread comments.
having trawled through some of the subsequent misinformed "outrage!!1!" I stand by my observation. . . there are but a handful of posts here, most notably those from kayl, that actually advance the awareness of the situation beyond drama.
how is it that the "most critical ethical/legal dilemma" in amrka's history gets such little respect in presentation?
I like humour as much as most here, but this joke's not funny anymore.
Yes, they deserve to go down. I think it should be handled just like title insurance along the illegality thread. First in time is first in line. First illegal act gets prosecuted first then move down the chain until complete. The problem, and this is fantastically redundant at this point, is that there is no one prosecuting any of these crimes right now.
The squatters have legal, ethical, and lawful rights to the property they bought without paying back these loans.
They have been defrauded of their credit by the banks. The problem is squatters haven't filed the UCC 1 Financing Statements, because our public school system does not teach individuals how to manage their commercial affairs.
The lawyers sit back and lead people into dishonor with the courts.
When you file the UCC 1 Financing Statement, you have the standing to discharge all debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code. See my other posts for details.
Ok. On the UCC thingie -- how 'bout you write up a cohesive contribution to ZH and see if it can get posted. I am rather confused about the whole concept. Not to be derogatory, but it looks a bit like the "How not to pay your income taxes" articles I trip over from time to time. If it's viable, post it: Create content
I'm writing out a three-part series. However, maybe you can help me. I want to write a Guest post, but don't have my own blog. Which link in the Create Content area gives me the right editing tool?
I look forward to reading what you have to say kayl, hopefully a "tyler" will grant you the space to post.
weren't we supposed to be bringing down a "system" that imprisons us all in ignorance? not pointing fingers at others kept in the same ignorance? how about we stop with all the micro-points-of-view, and get back to the wide-angle.
Yes, finger pointing is useless. Hitting the books and understanding the debt-based monetary system and the Uniform Commercial Code will throw some light on these bankers.
The fact that the online UCC filing tools allow banks to upload massive files to generate liens against people is a big hint.
Kayl,
I have a blog and would welcome your three-parter on it. Seriously. You can link it to here (ZH). Open offer if it takes too much doing to get it up here.
I wish I'd known conclusively about UCC in my 12 years in the US.
ORI
http://aadivaahan.wordpress.com
Ask Cognitive Dissonance for those pointers. He has the experience.
Ethics? What do (your?) ethics have to do with it?
Sez in this here lawbook that the bank can't have the land until it does X. It ain't done X yet. Its greed and stupidity hoisting the banks, not anybody's "ethics."
When was the last time a Bank gave a debtor a Mulligan when they couldn't come up with whatever the required X was?
If I was the new family I think the solution is very simple. Because there is no rule of law now, take matters in your own hands. They should view this as the moral thing to do because the cops let it happen.
1) Get a bunch of big guns
2) Go to the house at 2am when lazy MSN TV crews are asleep.
3) Shoot and kill all of the shitty assholes.
4) Dump their bodies some where.
5) Wait a week, there will be no one in the property or in court making claims, so you can just move in.
6) Wait a few months until things die down, then go after the lawyer to get back any monetary damages you're owed, do this legally or illegally, your call.
7) Sleep soundly knowing you've stood up and up held the law.
Or they could realize that shit's fucked up right now, mellow out, have a pan-galactic-gargleblaster and work through things in court like everyone else.
Of course, the mass murder would be more entertaining, I guess.
Because killing children in cold blood is always the best solution to a problem.
Judging from the comments and a million other data points, that seems to be the kind of social standard that the US is rapidly going to.
If you have a problem take a gun and shoot somebody. It's the American way.
Citizen: Shoot first, ask questions later.
Institution: Foreclose first, worry about documentation issues later if a pay-off doesn't get the job done.
Hmmm, I wouldn't call it the best solution. But it would get coverage, coverage, coverage - and generate plenty of comments. Might even beat out Idol among the masses for a day or two. It would be served up on MSM to distract and, yes, entertain - and the bulk of the population would lap it up. That, in itself is a sad commentary on where we are as a people.
Fame has never been as easily or immediately attainable as today. Simply post a lot of pics and some rantings online on Day One, then do something off-the-wall crazy on Day Two.
On Day Three, bask in Global Infamy.
Sounds like a bad episode of Law & Order.
The first thing these banks want is to create property wars and have everybody go into all out war among themselves. How stupid!
Do you even know how the debt-based monetary system works or the Uniform Commercial Code- Contract law- in the world?
The original buyers of the house have been defrauded of their credit. The lawyers are leading people into dishonor with the courts.
The only way to clear this up is for buyers to establish their standing to handle their own commercial affairs by correctly filing the UCC 1 Financing Statement. Then, they must discharge their debt under Article 3 of the Uniform Commercial Code!
There is no money, and there is no debt. Only debt-based money and the discharge of debt. The PTB have created an entire new vocabulary to block the average individual from understanding how this system operates. Go get a Black's Law dictionary. Look up the words transmitting utility, person, name. We are the transmitting utilities that create money in the debt-based monetary system. We are the principals and owners of all credit. We are the chattel, surety, and slaves of the monetary system unless we file a UCC 1 form. See my other posts.
are you suggesting that the Earl's place a lien on the bank because Federal Reserve Notes are debt-based? That they are indebted to pay back a debt with debt-based notes so this somehow cancels out in their favor based on the structure of the loan? ???
wait, yer say'n, what are you say'n?
No. No. No.
The debt-based monetary system has two kinds of money: money of account is the credit we have for us at the US Treasury. See when you were born, your birth certificate was sold to the IMF bank. The US Treasury received a certain amount of credit from $500,000 to 1 million based on the year you were born against the future productivity of you, the DEBTOR. We are Debtors by default in our debt-based monetary system. We are the chattel and surety of the debt-based monetary system.
However, we are the lawful principals and owners of the credit under the Uniform Commercial Code. When you get a mortage loan, the bank doesn't give you its money or credit. It accesses YOUR credit at the Treasury with your signature on the loan application. The bank withholds your credit. They move you on into signing a promissory note that makes you promise to pay them back for YOUR credit plus interest for the life of the loan. You are paying with debt-notes, FRNs, that you get from a job or investments.
However, the Uniform Commercial Code doesn't specify whether loans must be paid with debt-notes or money of account. When you file a UCC 1 Financial Form you are claiming yourself as the CREDITOR with a security interest in the assets, debts, liens, real property of you yourself the DEBTOR. Once you really learn the debt-based monetary system and the Uniform Commercial Code and all the history, then you are prepared to handle your own commercial affairs.
Let me tell you that you are still treating money as though it is gold and silver. You are using antiquated words. In THIS economy, by law an individual cannot pay a debt, he can only discharge debt since there is no gold and silver backed money. And you can discharge debt by filing three pieces of paper: the presentment, the transfer instrument, and the surety bond or promise to pay. The transfer instrument is just a three-party check that you write up that instructs the US Treasury to process a non-cash discharge of debt by accessing your exemption (credit) account at the Treasury. Under the UCC you are defined as a "Transmitting Utility."
Get a Black's Law dictionary, preferably 4 or 5th edition. Look up the words pay, discharge, person, transmitting utility, name. For example, a person is a corporate fiction with a diminished capacity of rights.
There is no money and there is no debt. There's only debt-based money and the discharge of debt. That's the new meme.
Learn to handle your commercial affairs and discharge your debt under the Uniform Commercial Code. It's the law.
very interesting. thank you. i appreciate you taking the time to clarify this viewpoint.
Since we are, in essence, "debtors" to the IMF. Can this debt ever be repaid by an individual who claims himself or herself as "creditor" with a security interest in the debt?
For example, I have no loans except for the future payments toward reducing the national debt. how does this play into these laws? what are your thoughts?
thanks for taking the time.
In your particular case, you are owed money by the Federal government. The money they received from the IMF is yours and becomes part of the national debt equation. Technically, the people who are redeeming their birth certificates are reducing the national debt. Voila.
Once you claim yourself as the CREDITOR, you remove the presumption that the IMF is the creditor.
This is their plausible deniability. Hey, we have a means for people to discharge debts and redeem their birth certificates, but if they don't file and become official creditors, it's not our problem.
The people in the know are the higher ups in banking, law, accounting, and even the Freemasons and special social groups. They are taking us down for lack of knowledge.
I can't believe I waltzed passed this comment before. You need to be called out: NEVER INITIATE FORCE, M'FKR.
-INFINITY
The Earls definitely saw Fight Club.
... exactly.
Latin: the law assists those that are vigilant with their rights, and not those that sleep thereupon.
Latin: he who exercises his legal rights harms no one.
Add: Poessionus is ninethuth/tenthuth of the lawthuth
Posession is 9/10th of the law
Funnious shitticus.
Pontius Pilate: What about you? Do you find it... wisible... when I say the name... 'Biggus'...
[chuckle]
Pontius Pilate: ... Dickus?
[both guards chuckle]
Pontius Pilate: He has a wife, you know. You know what she's called? She's called... 'Incontinentia'... Incontinentia Buttocks
Pontius Pilate: [Guards are laughing] Stop! What is all this?
Pontius Pilate: [laughing continues] I've had enough of this wowdy webel sniggewing behaviour. Silence! Call yourselves Pwaetowian guards? You're not - Seize him! Seize him! Blow your noses and seize him!
The law assists those that are tight with Hank Paulson.
When people loose everything they loose it.
Remember Jerry Kane.
When you take out a loan … you are actually the creditor (since technically the US is bankrupt). You make the note (contract) an instrument/money when you sign your name (applies to cheques too ... read the fine print where you sign).
Universal commercial code – UCC <- it’s all in there!!! (Brutally dry read though)
For some more insights into this ultimate uber-fraud … (briefly touched upon by some here at ZH)... see (search) …
YouTube "Jerry Kane" specifically "JKCH-1 Part 1 of 7" ... "JKCH-1 Part 7 of 7"
and "JKCH-2 Part 1 of 7" ... "JKCH-2 Part 7 of 7"
He (Jerry Kane) was onto something … BIG. Subsequently they (police in West Memphis, Arkansas) gunned him & his son down under suspicious circumstances (many months ago). Please … Look him up
Remember Jerry Kane.
Killing police officers is not the way to go about anything, at least not yet. It may not ever be the way to go about it. Who knows. We all have to figure out where we must fight our own battles. To die for nothing is one thing but to get your own son killed too, is just plain stupid. One day, there will be a time for this perhaps. That time is not here yet. Who knows when that time will arrive. Suicide by police officer is not the way to go. I have read about this UCC stuff for years and none of it ever works and the people who try it usually end up in prison , in jail for contempt of court, or worse , dead. the only reason this man and his son were killed is not because he was onto anything "big" so to speak. It is because they more or less started the deady confrontation by killing two cops. As for as civil unrest is concerned, I have always favored Ghandi's approach, even though he was unfortunately a agent of the British Government. We do have the second amendment and we do have a tradition of rebellion here in this country but common sense must prevail. It is rediculous for one man and his son to take on the entire police department. The odds are not in his favor. Also it must be stated, that these police officers may have been constitutionalist who were just doing their "jobs" waiting for the time when they could do something to help their country. There are many cops like that. These two guys these men killed may have been like that, not to mention the fact that they probably had wives and children and now their dads are dead along with Jerry Kane and his son. All in all, the whole situation was totally stupid and avoidable and needless violence, to say the least.
sounds like a charlatan.
Disobeying traffic laws? What is the point? Is this how to chose a particular battle?
Sounds half-baked. However, are you suggesting that this police officer was attempting to assassinate Jerry Kane? So the "powers that be" sent in an everyday police officer to murder a citizen who "knew too much"?
What a bunch of horseshit. get lost. This murderous thug was an antisocial malcontent, not a lover of liberty. Sounds to me as though he began to believe his own hype and two fine officers lost their lives as a result. very, very sad.
In America, when we have a problem then we take it up at the ballot box unless our lives are literally in jeopardy. our guns are simply for insurance in case anyone attacks directly our life, liberty, or property (including our gold). Every police officer that I know in the country feels the same way about the right to bear arms in order to protect life, liberty, or property.
Our monetary system may be blatantly flawed and on the road to its inevitable demise. However, this disgusting drivel about a murderer does not sit well with me at all.
Please, focus on facts and relevant points. Remember, police officers are our neighbors. Its best to keep focus on the vast erosion of our civil liberties by increasingly intrusive Federal agencies and government.
... is this a veiled threat to anyone exercising their legal rights? (I hear yah loud & clear)
… just because ‘might is right’ … does not make the actions of fascists just.
Remember … dead men tell no tales & history is written by the victor.
I not going to push it though … I do not want to end up it an insane asylum or worse, dead …
… like Jerry Kane.
Is he sitting in a prison cell next to Irwin Shiff, who pointed out through various provisions of the tax code that filing taxes is voluntary and who still got sent to prison for not volunteering.
Rule of Law is a nice sentiment, but in practise it is rarely what it pretends to be in theory. Some of the most brutal dictatorships have boasted about their dedication to restoring or maintaining the rule of law.
There never has been nor will there ever be a true rule of law.
Irwin Schiff is Peter Schiff's father.
Woody Harrelson's dad shot a Federal Judge.
Sent to the Federal trophy case: Florence ADX
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prisoners_at_ADX_Florence
Ask the Unabomber if he was serious about his Manifesto.
http://www.freeinfosociety.com/article.php?id=232
Our Tax Code is NOT Voluntary, as in you GET a choice to pay or not.
It's Voluntary, in that you Voluntarily FILE (meaning your not forced to come in to file).
AMENDMENT XVI
Passed by Congress July 2, 1909. Ratified February 3, 1913.
Note: Article I, section 9, of the Constitution was modified by amendment 16.
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
I looked through Jerry Kane's Affidavits. His work was full of truth, half-truths, and complete lies. So I find him more despicable than the bankers. Because the banks are straight out to defraud, but Jerry Kane was leading people into dishonor with the courts by selling them hope and a solution.
He was on the PTB side or too stupid and destined to be sacrificed on their satanist altar.
The biggest clue was an Affidavit claiming fraud and restitution from the banks. The text looked good strictly in the form of an Affidavit, but the last paragraph was a black eye, stating that the letter writer is requesting $10,000 in gold as restitution from the banks.
Anyone who has studied the history and laws knows full well that it is illegal to demand payment in gold for any debt or restitution since 1933. A clueless individual motivated by greed might go yah, I want gold from the bank. Sending such a letter would lead that individual into a crime and a dishonor with the court.
I read through all the literature, but you have to cross index with the Uniform Commercial Code and history. Most people don't do their homework, and they are lead into dishonor.
I looked up the raw video of them getting stopped the first time and saw Jerry's son shooting the policeman when the officer had his back turned to him. He shot him like 10 times.
# for deciding to take the law into their own hands, when suddenly there is no law
ooooooooh i get it.. those bustards Erls.. took home back... what about wall streeters who gambled people money's,, failed then took again TARP money and again good times keep on rolling
suckeers
alx
note to 'Conejo Capital Partners'
hey stupids idiots ITS NOT YOU TO DECIDE
WAS IT AGAINST THE LAW RE-TAKING THE HOME OR NOT...
it's your just a opinion... THERE WERE NO COURTS DESIGION WHETHER IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG..
o/t
So what happened in 1938 was that gov deficits were cut thereby causing a contraction in the economy (tea party). GDP contraction continues (who knows what the heck happens in the bond markets) until WWII or WWIII for us.
This is what tipped me off (iTulip's good)
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php/17145-The-American-Output-Ga...
This is what these bastards plan. I've been following the key visible players in the MSM and it makes sense. It will include LatAm.
Total freaking scumbags.
They also have 1.2 million armed "private contractors" (half of them foreigners) on their payroll.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRe2rcGlTHU DeGraw and Keiser 10/8/10
Uh, a lot of economists would tell you that a massive tax hike in the teeth of a recession or weak economy is not good for that economy. That's what Roosevelt did. And that's what happened in 1938. The gov't deficit got a little better through temporarily higher tax receipts and a little bit more spending discipline. But what do you think would happen to the U.S. economy now if tax rates went up as much as 20 percent?
Huh? I never mentioned taxes. I meant deficit spending reductions as in slashing "entitlements" by the tea party and others.
"The double-dippers argue that ongoing fiscal stimulus is the road we must take to avoid a second recession in a repeat of 1938, as if public spending will make the credit bubble era debt go away in a few quarters rather than commit the US to a decade of rising public debt and government spending dependence, as if the US in 2010 is Japan in 1995, with a huge trade surplus and capital account deficit, and as if we as a net foreign debtor can afford to expand the public debt for 15 years to muddle our way through a balance sheet recession to avoid a political confrontation with the banking lobby. The debt crisis prognosticators, on the other hand, understand the limits of a debtor nation’s balance sheet but they offer an equally fantastical solution, to cut spending and the deficits, as if the US was in a business cycle recession not a balance sheet recession and millions of households didn’t have trillions of debt payments to make."
http://www.itulip.com/forums/showthread.php/17145-The-American-Output-Ga...
I know you didn't mention it. But that's what actually happened in 1937 and killed the economy in '37 and '38. The universe is not just your post and your link. It includes actual history, some of which seems to contradict your post by showing an alternative explanation.
Actually FDR and his henchmen created an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty in the course of waging war against private enterprise and "the rich," but if it makes you feel better to think that government spending is the source of all that is good for you and society, then you keep on believin it because you are going to be seeing a lot more of it in the lame-duck session.
government spending = communism
communism does not have a good track record as it relates to long-term policy success (because it is a "broken window fallacy"). Multiply this sentiment when this communism is conducted with borrowed money where interest payments are sent to foreign investors.
conversely, 'organically grown' free trade amongst individuals (with gold and silver as mediums of exchange) has created rapid increases in the quality of life for all who are involved.
Any actions to decrease the former and increase the latter will aid in the healing of our economic and social wounds.
Just bulldoze the house down, problem solved.
Instead, bulldoze down the banks, Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, etc. That way you take care of many problems in a few easy large tasks versus millions of small tasks. Cut the head off the snake as it were.
So the 9-11 bombers missed?
What do we do with all of the unneeded wetbacks walking around looking for construction jobs?
Cheap hitmen?
This might be the moment to answer Tyler's question: "Is America on a burning platform?"
Not a 'burning platform' so much as it seems to now resemble a 'garbage dump fire' or a peat bog fire... The ones that burn deep within, smoldering for months and years without either going out or ever reaching a conflagration/engulfing point. It just smolders away, all stinky and fetid while people try their best to get on with their lives.
Coal mine fire?
Exactly. Just like that mine in PA that has been burining since 1962.
Nuke it.
Down the rabbit hole we all go...
Russia circa 1992, anyone?
There will be winners, losers, squatters, lawyers, banks, and courts which have contributed to this fiasco. Conejo Partners sound like simple house flippers to me, but what the hell do I know. How much did they make from the transaction?
The bottom line will have to be that the law (contract and real estate law) has been bent, broken, or otherwise violated. Had all those "i"s been dotted and "t"s been crossed there would be no dispute. The specific laws are State laws and the whole mess should be passed onto the shoulders of each State in which a violation has occurred.
Sure, some folks will end up with property that they have not paid for but the total amount will never equal, or even approach, the gains made by the banks in the execution of this process. Looking past the occasional squatter or free-loader to the underlying issue will be the task of each of us in keeping perspective. Getting federal action on these transactions will result in smothering and overbearing legislation. Ain't we got enough of that?
Spot on, Rocky.
The states need to deal with this.
I agree Mr. Racoon. Whether or I not I think this family has too many kids - none of my business. Whether or not I think they are welshers - still none of my business.
What is important is the the rule of law. And from what I have read over the weekend is that it was broken and not only wrt individual home owners.
Mr. Denniger has been doing a great job on reporting on foreclosuregate but I don't undersand why this would be important - comments?
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=169376
Simple. It showed that the bank (GS) was forging documents to 'steal" money from the homeowner via a loan out of thin air.
Well, I guess banks are licensed to forge documents to steal from you, if you don't understand.
Just didn't understand the ramifications of this - I don't own a home or even live the US anymore - just wanted to understand from a legal POV
It is said rule of law was the foundation of the US prosperity.
When was the last time you heard BANKS forging documents and robbing their customers?
Lawless means no trust which means no confidence. Soon, only the houses with no outstanding mortgage since 1997 will have clear title. All others will be viewed in a great suspension of cloudy.
No real estate transaction, no loans, no credit creation, no economic activity, no taxes, more deficit, more money printing, .... death spiral awaits at the end of the bottom.