This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
GMAC Mortgage Now Blames Eviction Halt On "Technical Defect", Says It Meant No "Disrespect" To US Judicial System
GMAC Mortgage has now definitively proven that they are completely unaware that once you are at the bottom of a really deep hole you should, generally, stop digging. In the latest twist in the increasingly more surreal saga of mishandled affidavits and possible outright title fraud, Bloomberg's Dakin Campbell reports that according to Ally spokesman Gina Proia, "the “defect” in affidavits used to support evictions was
“technical” and was discovered by the company. Employees submitted affidavits containing information they didn’t personally know was true and sometimes signed without a notary present, according to the statement. Most cases will be resolved in the next few weeks and those that can’t be fixed will require court intervention." Of course, this assumes a perfect world, in which tens if not hundreds of thousands of foreclosure notice recipients will not get the brilliant idea of hiring a lawyer on retainer and submit a fraudulent foreclosure claim against the servicer and/or mortgage holder (since nobody knows what the difference is anymore, probably both) leading to tens of billions in legal expenses, and the overturn of a like amount of previous eviction orders and rulings. The fact that money may well be owed and due is irrelevant: the fact that someone may have misappropriated billions worth of property that does not belong to them and based on willful fraudulent claims, as Alan Grayson wrote in his letter yesterday, however, very much is.
More from Bloomberg:
“The entire situation is unfortunate and regrettable and GMAC Mortgage is diligently working to resolve the situation,” Proia said. “There was never any intent on the part of GMAC Mortgage to bypass court rules or procedures. Nor do these failures reflect any disrespect for our courts or the judicial processes.”
No, alleged theft and unprecedented crime at never before seen levels, certainly mean no disrpected to the US judicial process. After all, who has any respect for that institution anyway? Let's not forget that in two months the SCOTUS will side with the Federal Reserve in the Pittman case, thereby eliminating any threat that someone who misappropriates hundreds of billions of "other people's money" based on a "technical defect" will ever have any (dis)respect for American laws. Also, let's not foget that the earlier finding of Court Fraud was targetted at JPM/WaMu, we are not sure why GMAC is suddently so defensive.
State officials are investigating allegations of fraudulent foreclosures at the nation’s largest home lenders and loan servicers. Lawyers defending mortgage borrowers have accused GMAC and other lenders of foreclosing on homeowners without verifying that they own the loans. In foreclosure cases, companies commonly file affidavits to start court proceedings.
“All the banks are the same, GMAC is the only one who’s gotten caught,” said Patricia Parker, an attorney at Jacksonville, Florida-based law firm, Parker & DuFresne. “This could be huge.”
Something tells us we know what kind of filings Parker & DuFresne is busy, busy, busy preparing today, on behalf of individual and class action plaintiffs.
Aside from signing the affidavits without knowledge or a notary, “the sum and substance of the affidavits and all content were factually accurate,” Proia wrote in the e-mail. “Our internal review has revealed no evidence of any factual misstatements or inaccuracies concerning the details typically contained in these affidavits such as the loan balance, its delinquency, and the accuracy of the note and mortgage on the underlying transaction.”
Affidavits are statements written and sworn to in the presence of someone authorized to administer an oath, such as a notary public.
Still, perjury would be a fun charge to add to felony embezzlement.
The rest of the article repeats things already discussed previously on Zero Hedge. Readers can find the full thing here.
- 6844 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -


capital punishment for bp and gmac
Dewey, Fuk Yu, and Howe ;)
And who, pray tell, in said company was responsible for compliance assurance...and who, pray tell, in said company has their signatures on the Sarbanes-Oxley documents attesting to the proper procedures and control systems being in place?
Ask not for whom the paper trail tolls....
Whatever happened to preponderance of the evidence?
If you are driving 2 miles an hour above the speed limit, and a child jumps out from between two parked cars 1 foot in front of you, you can't possibly stop in time. But if the child is paralyzed, you will lose big-time in court. Even though the preponderance of the evidence is 99% in your favor, you lose.
Here is the exact opposite case. Step 1, "buy" a house you can't afford, with no money down. Step 2, stop making payments. Step 3, the bank who is servicing your loan but not the owner of the loan moves to foreclose.
FRAUD! PUT THOSE BANKSTERS IN JAIL! CIVIL RIGHTS VIOLATIONS!
Isn't the preponderance of the evidence clear in this case? The resident of the home is NOT PAYING. He clearly has no right whatsoever to live in it, whatever squabble there may be between the regular servicer, special servicer, first mortgage holder(s), fannie, freddie, FHA, etc.
The conflict of interest between one tranche and another does not change the fact that the person living in the house is a squatter with no rights to be there!
But hey, it's only our money supply at stake. Let's destroy another couple of trillion dollars of deposits out of spite!
So by that logic, I should be able to evict you for not paying your mortgage. Doesn't matter that I do not hold the mortgage, just that you're not paying.
I haven't paid the paper boy in 3 weeks. What're you gonna do about it firstdivision? :>)
He will be at your home this evening.
http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u219/dacmugen/paperboy.jpg
Yikes! And I'll have the money ready.
Never stiff the paperboy if you want to keep your garden gnome between your legs.
My paperperson (to be politically correct) does not speak English and drives through the neighborhood recklessly while school children are walking to the bus.
"Four weeks, twenty papers, That's two dollars... plus tip." "I don't have a dime...sorry." "Didn't ask for a dime. Two dollars...cash."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ici3LCG9kGc
Start at 1:04 for most relevant clip.
Bearster, I've replied to this shit in the other thread... but here goes again, as succinct as I can make it. The lienholders have other forms of redress within the confines of the law, but they lose on this issue. Period. End of story.
This is getting tiresome, is it not?
the banks are violating the law. PERIOD.
The law is quite clear that to preserve your rights as a mortgagee, you MUST follow the law.
If you LOSE proof of your claim, you must PROVE you had it in the first place. Didn't these "banks" and CMO packagers pay attention to the LAW to preserve their rights?
LOL.
apparently not. it was a free-for-all...or shouuld I say a massive FEE-for-all.
So you'd be cool if the local SS stomped down the door and shot the evildoer/squatter in the face. Because he is a baaaaad man. Possibly even trespassing, if the house had a legitimate owner.
Gotcha. Excellent logic. Watch your back.
Extra credit: Do they need to check his ID first?
Don't forget those damn squatters' kids too! Out!!
Bearster, may I suggest you read this:
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=167106
Short version: The banks f'd up and they need to pay the price because it was their decision to loan the money and they alone must bear the consequences of having played fast and loose with the laws. And it should upset you, unless you're a banker, that these banks are selling foreclosed homes and keeping the proceeds which may actually belong to fannie and freddie, so this is really another taxpayer bailout of the banks!
At this juncture, banks are merely servicing companies for the GSEs. Until you show me more evidence that they keep, record, and utilize the proceeds, thereby converting them to their own use and enjoyment, then I will continue to believe they are simply servicing the obligations. I do agree that we should use every resource possible to uncover the truth though... I just think, in the end, it will be determined a wild goose chase.
What about your monthly mortgage payments? The banks service those long after your mortgage has been assigned to a GSE. Are the banks keeping all those payments too?
The big issue will be the absofuckinglutelyridiculous service fees banks charge. That is the bailout.
You have to own something before you can seize it. Feelings on squatting are irrelevant.
Your point is very valid. The problem here is that we should be a nation of laws and responsibility on both sides of the contract. Repeat this same thing for trading, forced healthcare, and the list goes on. I fear we have lost our way.
Let's destroy? As in you and I destroy? Like "we" are currently destroying our money supply? Time for the reset because the greed and corruption has run its course. What you're saying is go along to get along because it's better to have a corrupt system that functions half ass rather than a system that doesn't function at all. This is blackmail asshole.
Maybe there is a third choice. Let the fuckers eat cake. Since the system is coming apart at the seams, I say let the pain be felt wide and far. The alternative is pain for the middle class only. I'm egalitarian so I want everyone to share.
rolling....this is how far we've come in letting the corporations take over the system....they knowingly file fraudulent papers with the court, they attempt to illegally seize property from the peasantry....
and when caught? they walk away...."we meant no disrespect"....
what is wrong with us? why aren't we in the streets?
why isn't GMAC losing its corporate charter?
The whole thing about repossession always did baffle me. I know for a fact that the only one that can draw up a binding contract (That will stand in court)is an attorney. In a binding contract between two parties both have to exchange something of value or service or there would be no need for said contract. Give your son 5 acres of land and I promise you the attorney will write up the contract to read in exchange for 10 dollars --said piece of land even though he knows you gave it to him to bind the contract. Now being that the money was created out of thin air at the point of the loan, a bank never provided anything of value. Thus, they quietly agree to service the lending agreement with your name in all capital letters standing not for you but a ledger entry. Now where is their right to foreclose coming from if they never provided anything of value other than the energy to make a few keyboard strokes. Oh yea I forgot, they foisted the idea of Corporate Washington off on all of America,a free people which according to the Constitution they had no right doing.
Better make that twenty dollars and not $10 or $20.
That is if you want to be able to supposedly uphold it. But since that kind of shit went out the door. What is it with the whiners that think they can wid their controversy into court without ever having given consideration.
That lawyer would be better off listing a few real items (in excess of twenty dollars) on the other side of the consideration, as well as perhaps throwing in a fifty (Eagle).
If you want the Constitution in contracts, you should make sure that the amount of controversy exceeds twenty dollars (in Constitutional terms).
You need to pay. Not pass an evidence of debt across the table.
Nothing will come of this. It will all be swept under a rug come tomorrow.
Notice that Proia only says the "info" is correct...per an electronic copy of the Note.
Ownership of the Note is evidenced by producing the ORIGINAL SIGNED NOTE, not a photocopy of the original note nor a printout from an electronic file. Too bad she doesn't (and probably can't) state that GMAC can PROVE they actually own the Note.
LOL.
Ownership of the note is evidenced through a maze of originals and assignments. I have seen/participated in many foreclosures on all sides of the matter... I can say that very rarely do I ever see an original document. We're not talking about probating a will here... we're just talking about proving that you're the proper party to be bringing the suit... In order to do that, you have to connect the dots between the original issuer and yourself. Simple as that. It gets pretty difficult though when you sell your rights to foreclose to a GSE and still attempt to foreclose anyway... or the proper parties to assign you the right to bring the suit are scattered throughout the world and probably incapable/desireless to participate given their marginal effort and return.
"Meant no disrespect to the US Judicial system" That is usually what you say at your sentencing isn't it?
Your Honor, I meant no disrespect when I was doing 95 in a 65. I have since taken corrective action by installing a Valentine1.
http://www.valentine1.com/demo/demo1.asp
Good grief Charlie Brown. Every filing error or lazy clerk is not proof positive of fraud. Unless these "homeowners" are idiots, they will take the 2% for the keys deal and get the hell out of Dodge. They have no right to live forever in a house they have no intention of paying for.
Or would you rather trash 500 years of English common law for the sake of pissing on a few more bankers. We have work to do, and there are real problems to address.
Notice the word that you used.."law". It means that you follow it both ways. The lazy clerks caused the issue to be fraud. Now personally I believe the clerks should be charged with the fraud, but the banks will have to follow the law as well and refile correctly. So with them filing without the right to the title, and doing so knowingly, is fraud by definition. Meaning the person that holds the title to the house needs to file the proceedings. Those that bought traunches do not hold a title, only an entitlement to the debt owed.
The clerks, like the issuers, packagers, servicers, and everyone else along the line are simply not suited to handle the volume and complexity of most transactions... Don't worry though, all this will get sorted out through credit contraction.
a filing error??? or a lazy clerk???
how about the packagers of CMO's sold something they now can't prove they ever took possession of...i.e. the original note.
Methinks your understanding of common law leaves much to be desired. Forsooth, you would lay yourself and all of us, and our children, at the feet of tyrants, in order merely to inflict a moral umbrage upon a fellow citizen who, FOR ALL YOU KNOW, merely lost their means of livelihood, ceased payment to debtors, and waits peacefully for the due process of the law to make itself felt.
When in bitter truth, the debtor himself has no claim; the claim was inadvertantly lost, indeed, much as the citizens' means of livelihood was.
Are you such a Lord that you have the scales of justice implanted in your trousers?
....by the way the further disruption of real estate markets has a very direct bearing on the entire situation, which simply reinforces the original folly of attempting to hold back the tide on bond haircuts a la King Canute or did you not get that part...and widespread fraud and disregard of the law by corporations is exactly the real problem we are here to address....bitchez
Egads, thou deservest +1280!!
For Christ's sake it's not that complicated. To be in accordance with the law, the forecloser has to be able to provide an original, signed, certified copy of the note, properly recorded, etc. THAT is the law -- it doesnt make any difference if the foreclosee is Mother Teresa or Jack the Ripper. I do not understand why suddenly the assumption is that if we don't let GMAC (or who ever) foreclose on property that they have no legal basis for than we are siding with the deadbeat (as perceived) that isn't paying. The holder of the note has legal bearing to file and well and truly should. But we don't need the precedent of who ever the hell feels like it going and filing a foreclosure cause they thought they should/could or would.
The banks (or anyone) shouldn't get a "pass" just because they created a rat's nest of securitization and now can't find let alone follow the paper trail. That is the cost of bad business practices.
"trash 500 years of English common law for the sake of pissing on a few more bankers"
OK ! Now we are getting somewhere !!
Oh ? You meant that in a negative way. Too bad.
By my count, these "technical issues" are the only laws remaining that we haven't ignored or changed to protect the gangbanging bankster Lords from the consequences of their actions.
Look, this should not be difficult. In order to foreclose on property you own, you have to show the court that you are the true owner of the property. Simply produce the signed ORIGINAL document. Whoops, can't find it? Well whose fault is that? Not the homedebtor.
An affidavit is a legal document because the affiant is SWEARING UNDER OATH that something is true and correct. Swearing to something that is not true on an affidavit is the same as lying to the judge. They don't like that very much. When you file a foreclosure action in court, you are seeking the State's sanction in recovering your (supposed) property. I can't think of a faster way to piss off the Court short of disrepecting the judge in open court.
Somehow your point is lost on so many people. Also, the court has a tendency to give some leeway to professionals because the expectation is that they are.....um....professional. They should know, understand and follow the letter of the law. They are thus held to a higher standard when they don't because there is no excuse for not knowing what's going on and how things should be done.
They are given a little leeway and not questioned closely to see if they followed procedure. Now that the court is finding that they didn't follow procedure in thousands of cases, the court will be rightfully pissed off. Just as a CFP is held to a higher fiduciary standard, so are professionals bring cases to court, even if that professional is not a lawyer.
Now, let's see how "professional" the judges are and if "national security" will be used to sweep this under the rug. My bet is that it will be.
I think I struck a nerve here. Look, no one doubts that the loans were made, nor that the current occupants of the property are not paying. Are you arguing for infinite squatter's rights, or what? Eventually, the paper work will catch up, and the sheriff will be at the door.
If some of you get what you want, which is to make it all but impossible to foreclose on defaulted loans, there will be no more mortgages in the US. I can live with that. Can you?
Then let the paperwork catch up.
The other crime here is that gmac may be giving away the lender's property. To hell with the squatter.
There would be nothing stopping a new institution from creating mortgages. They only need to follow the law...
No, you didn't strike a nerve here. Everyone is trying to explain to you (patiently, I might add), that you are missing the point entirely.
"Are you arguing for infinite squatter's rights, or what?"
Of course not. What we are trying to point out is that when you are asking the law to do something (namely evict someone), YOU have to follow the law too. It is called a condition precedent. This is pretty much contract law 101. Our problem is that GMAC (and probably all the rest) cheated. They are evicting people without actually proving they are the true owner. As pointed out upthread, the courts probably gave too much leeway to the affidavits because the bank lawyers know the magic words.
"I can't think of a faster way to piss off the Court short of disrepecting the judge in open court."
Nor, weinerdog, can I think of a better way to demonstrate your actual contempt for the law and legal process. Protestations notwithstanding.
You got it Frank!
2 issues. If the homeowner in delinquency gets to keep his home without paying off the mortgage because of:
1: The buyer of the loan never perfecting lien or
2: The foreclosing entity basically committed fraud in the forecloseure proceedings as a result of intent or negligence (stupidity).
Then that homeowner has a once in a lifetime windfall and should act accordingly (with some humility)
lazy clerk...this was massive fraud that was known no doubt by many people and many more people knew of it via grapevine at these offices and at the law firms...
if note difficult to find, own up in front of judge and make some arrangements, shoot, go the legislature to change the law to something reasonable if you need to, this is a massive problem but don't freaking lie and cheat...
I hope this puts a death knell in securization as we have known it, it was rife for fraud....apparently on both ends...too many perverse incentives to cheat as loans were hot potatoes of stinky poo that people off loaded onto next suckers
"500 years of English common law"
You mean the elites' toilet paper?
Or would you rather trash 500 years of English common law for the sake of pissing on a few more bankers.
Umm, has there been any pissing on any banksters to date? I cannot believe I missed that! Links, please.
All Common Law was banned by the US court in Thompson vs Eerie circa 1935. Besides we don't have any money, just a debt-based monetary system where the principal is the originator of his own credit.
The banks had no security interest in the mortgage contract to begin with. If any "person" (ficititious corporation) owes money under color of law, he can well discharge it under color of law.
The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL) revised Article 9 of the UCC in the 90s to change the way ownership is established. (It always helps when you control the law and shape it to your intentions when you want to confiscate a bunch of houses following a housing bubble.)
Well, they didn't do a good job, and it smacked them in the face. Did some of the judges fail to get the memo? This isn't about technical problems in the filings. The servicing providers expected Article 9 to back them up.
A regular living being can't even file an Affidavit at County Recorder offices across the US anymore. What ever happened to fair application of the law?
Please, we are so far away from Common Law.
How literally do you mean:
All Common Law was banned by the US court in Thompson vs Eerie circa 1935.
Also, how the hell can some bunch of bozos with a name ("National Conference of Commissioners") supposedly unilaterally decide how to dispense with the rights, properties and lives of everyone?
Another way to look at this is this. NO law exists any longer, ONLY "color of law" == "appearance of law". Which is circular... meaning... literally, none of us are required to follow any law unless we decide to voluntarily subject ourselves to NON-law (pure appearances).
This I do believe (and know, in fact). However, the next very practical question is... what to do when all those predator-thugs hired by the predators-that-be pull their guns and attempt to assault-us, kidnap-us, lock us in cages, run us through pure fraudulent "color of law" sharades, etc?
yup, English common law. It says that title conveyed based on a fraudulent foreclosure is pretty much worthless. I wouldn't go to a GMAC foreclosure auction anytime soon.
Even worse. The guy who has made all his payments and has found a willing buyer, who rightfully insists on a release of lien at closing. But GMAC can't prove it owns the lien. Which means it can't validly release the lien. So, pretty much anyone with a GMAC loan cannot sell their house until this is cleared up.
You are willfully ignoring the fact that GMAC has clearly harmed many of its borrowers who have met all the terms of their contract.
OK they get to foreclose on the deadbeats. In exchange they must do everything it takes to make whole all their paying borrowers who cannot right now aquire clear title to their houses.
How does that grab you?
"Technical Defect" = "Wardrobe Malfunction" = Bullshit
Translation: Unfortunate that we got caught.
Picky, picky, picky. Besides, since we told on ourselves, we get a muligan.
We intend to intimidate everyone who is currently in the confiscation....er.....foreclosure process into going along with the confis....foreclosure. Plus we have allocated $90 million for brides....er.....political donations over the next few weeks until midterms.
The only disrespect we have is for those damn squatters. We love our bought and paid for legal system. Don't let us down when we really need you or we'll sink the stock market like we did on May 6th. Just kidding.....not.
Ritholtz junked you.
LOL
Always nice to know who the junker is. :>)
+1
GMAC is just the tip of the iceberg.
The velocity of loan issuance, securitization and loan sales to third parties from 2002 through 2006 pretty much assures that many, many mistakes were made by under staffed back office operations to perfect ownership of mortgage notes.
Now comes the shit storm. I hear the paper shredders whirring to life. I personally recommend the GBC Shredmaster Arthur Anderson signature model.
What I want to know is BOA's reaction to this since they bought out Countrywide.
more legal fees...
Bloomberg reported in June 2009 that Bank of America (or its insurers) was paying the three defendants' legal fees under the indemnification agreements they had with Countrywide, which BofA acquired. According to BofA spokeswoman Shirley Norton, the bank is still paying those fees.
http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1202472258698&Judge_Clears_SECs_Fr...
Depends. I refer to the personal hygiene product.
There is not going to be going to be much choice for BofA. The Countrywide crimes have not been anywhere near fully exposed yet.
The story is getting some good play right now on Bloomberg TV. It is going to involve ALL LARGE LENDERS. I hear those shredders whirring again.........
I'm curious about this myself. We had a Countrywide mortgage that was bought by Bank of America. A little over a year ago, when the HAMP program was getting going, I called and inquired about it. We were rejected out of hand, I guess, because they took a little information and never got back to us.
Lo and behold, we received, unsolicited, two separate mailings from BofA in the last two weeks complete with prepaid FedEx mailers to apply for HAMP as soon as possible. They were accompanied by letters strongly urging us to reapply for the program and reduce our interest rate/principal/so forth.
So, I'm wondering if this big push has something to do with this court ruling and if applying for HAMP would somehow legalize a fraudulent mortgage?
I would absolutely NOT fill out that paperwork.
In most states, the "first mortgage" grants you special rights that no longer exist in a re-finance. Further, when you enter HAMP, you're effectively establishing a new contract -- the old contract no longer exists.
IMHO, do NOT fill out that paperwork. If they have no recourse under the old contract, you don't want to deal with them under a new contract. If they want it, then you DO NOT.
Further, even if this issue didn't exist (your old contract was fine), IMHO the HAMP contracts are terrible (IMHO they are designed to screw the homeowner, bounding the bank's risk, but not yours). However, YMMV.
I figured as much. Both sets went straight to the shredder.
Oh, my. Now I'm really suspicious. FedEx just dropped off TWO more packages of paperwork. The original sets had a "deadline" of 9/18; these new sets have a "deadline" of 10/7.
I'm starting to sense some desperation.
I'm lovin' it! I suspect ZH may have done you a special service with this information. I'm just a member of your audience, but I gotta get my satisfaction where I can. I know you don't "mean any disrespect" not signing their papers. Bwahahahahahha! Those banksters need to leave your family alone.
Regards to Silver Belle and her tribe.
LOL! Now they're calling me, asking if I have any questions about the package or assistance in filling it out and getting it back in.
I told the rep that I wasn't planning on sending it back in and she was aghast. I asked if the program had changed any since I had contacted them about it last year. She said no. So, I asked her why I should waste my time filling out the paperwork if I'd already been rejected last year.
No answer, other than her mumbling that I should at least try again. I said that if they are so gung-ho about "helping" me out, they should send me an offer letter showing what they're willing to do in regards to my interest rate/principal with a simple signature line for acceptance.
Thanks for posting. We shall see if the soap opera continues. I see the evil Snidely over there in Bankerville, rubbing his greasy banker hands together, trying to consider what to do next. What a scream!
+100. The wave of shredding and plausible deniability will be deafening. And the circus atmosphere will grow as we get closer to the US elections, and TPTB will shuck and jive to curry favor and the most votes.
It's both amusing, and embarrassing.
+1
Go long Congressional-size shredders!
That sucker looks like it can handle bodies as well as documents.
"Officer, he slipped while feeding "The Beast".
A friend will help you move.
A real friend will help you move a body.
That saying always brings out a chuckle. Right up until I'm asked to "help". :>)
Edit: I just used it at the top of another thread.
Starting to wonder if this could be a trigger of sorts. Lots of interested lawyers on the other side makes it hard to just sweep it away.
Assuming this issue is rampant in the MBS system, it could touch everyone.
Sept./Oct. surprise?
Sept/Oct black swan, coming home to roost? We can only hope. I have been so let down by the monumental shit that no one gave a crap about, I don't dare hope this time.
None of the homeowners are going to get to keep the homes... the only issue is how much of a haircut the 1st priority lienholders have to take because of a failure to follow protocol. It's a zero sum game, so all this means is that the 1sts get fucked and the 2nds and 3rds of the world get some action...
If you're looking for a play, I'd find the folks with the 2nds and 3rds and pick em up cheap... they're probably firsts in disguise... presuming they have their paperwork in order.
Karl has an interesting view on this.
http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=167106
Me likes, me likes! This is justice! No I would not benefit, but that is not the point. RULE OF FUCKING LAW, for once.
it's a nice start. the banksters committing fraud should be hit with criminal r.i.c.o. charges.
A textbook case . . . even for a kindergartener.
Beautiful! Thanks for the link.
So how does one go about finding out who/when/where your home loan was sold to? I took out a first that was immediately sold...now it is serviced by b of a. The fannie website says they own a loan/home at my address....are they the end holder?
Of course, this assumes a perfect world, in which tens if not hundreds of thousands of foreclosure notice recipients will not get the brilliant idea of hiring a lawyer on retainer and submit a fraudulent foreclosure claim against the servicer and/or mortgage holder (since nobody knows what the difference is anymore, probably both) leading to tens of billions in legal expenses, and the overturn of a like amount of previous eviction orders and rulings.
Yeah right, because all the foreclosure recipients are flush with cash. Dream on, 99% of these people can't afford an attorney.
if they are employed and living rent/mortgage free, they will find a thousand or so in a few months...sure completely broke ones, no...but even if on UI, if you have no mortgage payment, you can save some money
Yeah right, because all the foreclosure recipients are flush with cash. Dream on, 99% of these people can't afford an attorney.
I understand where you're coming from...that's why Tyler said "hiring a lawyer on retainer". You don't have to afford an attorney, they'll get paid out of the settlement.
If you're unemployed you have lots of time to research how to file pro se. Any IT guy whose job was outsourced to India is smart enough to do it.
They are all criminals. "No disrespect to the judicial system". Should we really expect anything else?
Evidently, it is perfectly ok to bail out a shitty company like GMAC that belongs in bankruptcy.
Evidently, it is ok for said bailed out company to operate it's business like a cattle baron who owns the town and has no reason to follow legal procedures.
Ergo...I couldn't give a rats ass in Toledo if some trailer clown wants to squat in his MOHO and buy beer, IPads and flat screen TVs with his mortgage payments...
Because that my dear countryman is now the American way.
CLUEDO SUBPRIME
http://williambanzai7.blogspot.com/2010/09/cluedo-subprime-edition.html
Bill Gross on PIMCO commenting on the Fed Decision recommends GMAC yielding 5%. Says that while GMAC is not govco guaranteed, its close.
So in all seriousness, what happens when someone loses the title/deed to land/property that they do own? Do they just go to the town clerk and pay for a new deed?
Can someone just go down to the town hall and ask for a deed to a swanky mansion that they happened to bike by and thought was cool? If there is no legitimate title to it, what kind of court case would ensue? I assume the court would eventually give title to the 'rightful' owner....right? What if this corporate process of scissoring up titles actually destroys the titles if they just toss them in the process?
Anyone check the landfills? Paper decays very slowly as it turns out. You can still read the phone books from the 1950s in a Phoenix landfill. Maybe the titles are ok after all.
Can we get Hawaii 5-0 on this? Did I say "in all seriousness" before?
srsly
I think it cost a few hundred if you have right info,
the homeowner has the title. it gets mailed to them a couple weeks after closing because it gets recorded first.
the lender records the mortgage.
Five, maybe six years I got a line of credit against my home which I owned outright, with WAMU. Never once borrowed a nickel from them, well, actually myself. After the Chase merger, I got a notice from Chase telling me that my paperwork for a second mortgage with WAMU had never been filed at the court house and that I needed to do all the paperwork over again.
I told them to send the paperwork to Jamie and his cronies.
Civil procedures must be followed and that's the law. It's up to the defendant to rebut the plaintiff's claim whatever that may be. You don't need a lawyer to rebut. If the plaintiff says something is true, the defendant must, in essence, say "Prove it". Defendant just needs to know when to rebut.
As an additional note, keep in mind that the transaction (meaning the loan) is fraudulent in the first place. There was no exchange in value. Banks create money out of thin air. Here is a landmark case exposing this truth.
http://www.constitutionalconcepts.org/creditriver.htm
So, what we have here is a situation which begs the questions "Did the plaintiff really borrow anything?". "Did the bank really lose anything as it was a journal entry of no value other than ink?". "Is the banking system, as it is organized now, really a legalized counterfeiter?" You decide.....
Clearly the judge was correct. Clearly FiatMoney and FederalReserve and FractionalReserveBanking are all fraud and unconstitutional.
However, be very, very careful. Why?
Because the case was tried in "common law" jurisdiction. In other words, the case was between "a human being" and "a corporation".... on "human being" turf.
The problem is, if you sign a [mortgage or other] contract in which your name is spelled in all capital letters, the contract is between a "person" (one type of corporation) and another corporation. By signing the contract, you (a "human being") unwittingly agree to be responsible for the "person" (a corporation) in the contract... at least as far as the "legal society" is concerned.
In other words, unless you are extremely careful, and have extremely well researched the law (and the endless pages of legalese concerning legal fictions), you will not get the court to accept your case "in common law" jurisdiction. Today, virtually (maybe literally) every court is a corporation in cahoots with the "legal society" and other corporations for the express purpose of subverting, defrauding and enslaving all human beings. Therefore, they will almost always refuse to allow you to have your court case in "common law jurisdiction"... they will hold it in "admiralty court" AKA "private court" that is 100% designed to destroy you.
In this court, "anything goes". You have ZERO rights, you submit to whatever decision they wish to make, no matter what. They simply assert they have unlimited rights and you have zero. In effect, they say "if you hold your hearing in our court, you agree to abide by our rules", and they treat that as a contract that you are stuck with if you voluntarily sign (or say "understand", or "rise when the court-jerks says 'all rise'", or obey even one order/demand from the judge or fictitious "court").
You cannot win in their court, because their court is utterly "outside the law" --- and I mean this literally.
They claim "connection to" the law on the following basis: that you (as a "human being") can agree to private contracts, and if you break them, you have broken the law against fraud (in common law). So, you see, while you think you are in a real court of law, you are not. You are in a private interaction with private corporation and its predators employees (the judge, the attorneys (including yours), and everyone else in the room). And by having ANY interaction with them, they simply DEEM you have agreed to accept whatever abuse they wish to dump upon you.
They have turned this deception into the most egregious and massive fraud in the history of mankind. The main trick (from their perspective) is getting you to accept "joinder" with the legalese fiction called your "person". The name of your person is the same as your name, except spelled with all CAPITAL LETTERs. They have many ways to trick you into accepting "joinder" with the fiction (which is the same as accepting responsibility for that fiction/person/corporation AND acknowledging them as masters of your fate because they act as masters of those fictions).
When they say "will the defendent please rise", if you rise, you establish "joinder" --- and the rest of what happens in the case is utterly irrelevant, because you've agreed they can do anything whatsoever to you.
When they say "do you understand the charges against you" and you say "yes", you do not realize (and they sure as hell don't tell you) that they are NOT speaking English, they are speaking "legalese" in which the word "understand" means "stand under". So when you say "yes" to "understanding", in their predatory scam, you have agreed to "stand under" their jurisdiction and "stand under" (take responsibility for) the charge. So the question of "guilt" or "innocence" is irrelevant, because you've already agreed to let them do whatever they wish to you.
And you CANNOT get a lawyer to help you. To get their license to practice from the "legal society" or "bar" or whatever it might be called, attorneys must agree to never let you in on their scams AND never help you avoid being wrongly scammed into accepting jurisdiction of UCC against you (UCC == "uniform commercial code"). And in this context, "commercial" means --- "you have no rights".
So, while the story above is true and the point is correct, do not imagine for one nanosecond that doing this yourself is easy... or even possible. If you ever signed a document that has your name in all CAPITAL letters, the predators-that-be may be able to prevent you from escaping back to "common law". Most judges will deny you a case in common law, and direct you to UCC, in which you have virtually zero chance. The FederalReserve and rest of the predators-that-be essentially ARE the creators and manipulators of UCC. In UCC, you lose.
ssshh, you and kayl are making too much sense ;~)
Hell of a post up there.
These bankers revised Article 9 of the UCC in the late 90s in anticipation of their moves in the planned collapse of the housing bubble. I guess they didn't do a good enough job, and now it's slapping them in the face. Or maybe some of the judges didn't get the memo.
EXCUSES
http://williambanzai7.blogspot.com/2010/09/excuses-for-gmacally-perjury....
The 'indenture' should be brought back. Any man/woman who signs a contract should create an 'indentur' (easy with modern technology). Create documents to be signed as 11 x 17ths. Duplicate text. A clear indenture partition. Sign in blue ink. (color copiers are too good). Sign across the indenture. Tear it down along the rip line. Keep the original. Don't record it. File it for record. Demand production of the original if need be later. Watch the squirm (when bales of securitized stuff has to be torn open)
" ..meant no disrespect to the judicial system.."
So just meant to trash the little people? And GMAC was so nice when they made the loans. This will no doubt ramp up Volt sales at GM. But trying to foreclose with less documentation than a late night dishwasher at a Denny's?
Amigo, this really not look so good no more for you...
"this could be huge"
And now even average lawyers can save you from being foreclosed on.
This will be a non-issue in a couple of months. The Kongress will just pass a new law allowing the servicer to foreclose underwater RE. Oh, and it will be hailed as a big win for the little people since "it will optimize the paperwork and cut down unnecessary time- and money-consuming court hearings".