This is from one of my own pleadings, it titled;
TRACKING THE MORTGAGE CHRONOLOGY
H&R Block Originates the alleged Mortgage
Dated; June 9 th, 2005
Plaintiff ERROR #1 Here is where the confusion/obfuscation begins. Plaintiff
introduces “as evidence”
Plaintiff’s exhibit no 25,
Titled “EXECUTION COPY”
RE: Purchase Price and Terms Agreement” Dated “As of ” One day after the alleged Mortgage creation! Purporting to explain how Barclay’s Bank has bought the alleged Mortgage Note and debt from Option One after Option One had combined that same note and debt into “The Trust”. Yet next, you will notice that the alleged Mortgage has yet to be assigned to Option One. That will not occur for another June 10, 2005 140 days (over 4 months!). It should also be noted that Plaintiff’s Exhibit #25 lacks any signatures or authentication by either “Buyer” or “Seller” clearly in violation of U.C.C. and Contract & Securities Laws and as such represents NOT a legally binding Contract as previously noted.
RULE 1002. Requirement of Original
To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by statute enacted by the General Assembly not in conflict with a rule of the Supreme Court of Ohio.
Plaintiff ERROR #2 Plaintiff’s Exhibit #26 titled “ EXECUTION COPY FLOW
AMENDED AND RESTATED MORTGAGE LOAN PURCHASE AND
WARRANTIES AGREEMENT” ( Dated August 15 th, 2005 2 Months and 5 days after the above referenced exhibit #25 but still the The Assignment from H&R Block (alleged Mortgage Originator) to Option One. Plaintiff’s months before Exhibit “10”
This document catalogs the purchase of the “Trust” from the “Company & Seller” Option One Mortgage to the “Purchaser, Barclay’s Bank, PLC
Again, it should be noted that
Plaintiff’s Exhibit #26 lacks proper signatures or
“Seller” clearly in violation of U.C.C. and Contract & Securities Laws and as such represents NOT a legally binding Contract.
That said, the conclusion so far is that the alleged Note & Mortgage could not have been included into the Trust” nor into the ownership of Barlays Bank PLC until at least the day of or after the day of the Assignment from H&R Block to Option One Mortgage Corporation dated November 22
Plaintiff’s ERROR # 3 Plaintiff’s Exhibit # 27 titled “ EXECUTION COPY
ASSIGNMENT AND CONVEYANCE” dated August 19 th, 2005.
This document does purportedly represent the Assignment and Conveyance of the “Trust” from Option One to Barclays Bank PLC,
Again, it should be noted that Plaintiff’s Exhibit #27 any lacks proper signatures or authentication by either “Buyer” or “Seller” clearly in violation of U.C.C. and Contract & Securities Laws and as such represents NOT a legally binding Contract as previously noted. Also, Assignment from H&R Block to Option One does not happen until October 27 th, 2005, nearly 2 months AFTER the alledged assignment and conveyance of the “Trust” that Plaintiff would have us believe already contained the mortgage, yet they submit proof it could not have had.
NOTICE… ALL OF THE ABOVE OCCURRED BEFORE THE FIRST ASSIGNMENT DATE! H&R Block Assigns Note & Mortgage to Option One
see assignment dated:
& Recorded November 22 October 27, 2005 nd, 2005
Plaintiff’s Exhibit “10”
Plaintiff’s ERROR # 4 Plaintiff’s Exhibit # 28 titled “EXECUTION COPY”
dated January 26 “BILL OF SALE” th, 2006.
Here we have a “Bill of Sale” that represents that “BARCLAYS BANK PLC (“the Seller”), in consideration of (i) the sum of
$1,214,208 ” ………………………… ,.30
Let me write that out…. One Million, two hundred and fourteen thousand, two hundred and eight dollars (I guess) then a coma(!) and then a decimal point (I guess) and 30 cents (I guess) dollars. This NOT a typographical error on my part (see Plaintiff’s Exhibit 28).
Naming Option One as the Servicer, Mortgage Ramp, Inc. as loan performance advisor and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association , as trustee as of January 26, 2006.
“to be paid to it in immediately available funds by SECURITIZED ASSET BACKED RECEIVABLES LLC (the “Purchaser) and (ii) the Class X, Class P and Class R Certificates issued pursuant to a Pooling and Servicing Agreement, dated as of January 1, 2006 (“the Pooling and Servicing Agreement”)
(Plaintiff’s Exhibit 18) ,, among the Purchaser, as Depositor, Option One Mortgage Corporation, as servicer and responsible party, MortgageRamp, Inc., as loan performance advisor, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee, does as of January 26, 2006, hereby sell, transfer, assign, set over and otherwise convey to the Purchaser without recourse, all the Seller’s right, title and interest in and to the Mortgage Loans described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof, including al interest and principal received by the Seller on or with respect to the Mortgage Loans.”………….
In Summary; Barklays Bank PLC sells the Mortgage Loans from the “Trust” to SECURITIZED ASSET BACKED RECEIVABLES LLC as Purchaser & Depositor, to Option One Mortgage Corporation, as servicer and responsible party, MortgageRamp, Inc., as loan performance advisor, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee, as of January 26, 2006 for an and for Class X, P & R Certificates issued pursuant to ““ undecipherable amount a ” Pooling and Servicing Agreement” and then divides ownership between the four in whatever ethereal undisclosed manner ….. as it does not specify.
Please note this document is accompanied by an unspecified signature page and is signed by one Paul Menefee “Director” from SECURITIZED ASSET BACKED RECEIVABLES LLC, and one John Cuccoli (probably misspelled but close!), Managing Director of BARCLAYS BANK PLC , and that there is no authentication given for either signatures power to enter into this contract and also no Power of Attorney Stamp and Seal accompanying this document and no signature date, clearly in violation of Contract & Securities Laws and as such represents NOT a legally binding Contract as previously noted.
Please note also the date of January 26. th, 2006 as the day of this transaction
As per Pooling & Servicing Agreement
On occurrence of a “Credit Event”
Trust Transfers Mortgage BACK to Option One
As per Pooling & Servicing Agreement section; 2:03 (d) “Within 30 days of the earlier of either discovery by or notice to the Responsible Party that any Mortgage Loan does not conform to the requirements”….”of any breach of a representation or warranty”….”that materially and adversely affects the value of any Mortgage Loan”… the Responsible Party shall”…..” remove such Mortgage Loan (a “Deleted Mortgage Loan”) from the Trust and substitute in its place a Substitute Mortgage Loan”………………..
So, contractually, according to the alleged Pooling & Servicing Agreement supplied by Plaintiff (
) , 90 days after the alleged default which occurred September, 2007 as of Plaintiff’s exhibit “20” (Payment History) , otherwise stated as January 2008, Option One Regained sole possession of the Note and Mortgage (with no assignment or any other authentication provided) and supplied Plaintiff’s exhibit 18 a substitute Note & Mortgage to take it’s place as is evidenced by Plaintiff’s own sworn evidentiary production of the Assignment from Option One Mortgage Corporation to Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (Plaintiff’s exhibit “11”)dated March 3, 2008 and recorded March 27 th, 2008, such date being AFTER recordation of Foreclosure action and as such voiding Plaintiff’s argument of Note holdership at time of foreclosure initiation and also voiding Plaintiff’s standing in this action!
It should be noted that the signatory page(s) given at the rear of the Pooling & Servicing Agreement each contain only One signature, with empty signatory spaces for each other and that there is no one Signatory page containing all signatures, no authentication of any signatures, no dates of signatures and no certification of any signatures by Power of Attorney clearly in violation of U.C.C. and Contract & Securities Laws and as such represents NOT even a legally binding Contract.
Please note date of
Re-Possession of Mortgage Note to Option One as January 2008.
As per Pooling & Servicing Agreement section; 203(d).
February 27 th , 2008 … Foreclosure Action is filed
assigns Note & Mortgage to Wells Fargo to act as Foreclosure then
See Assignment (Plaintiff’s Exhibit “11”
dated; and recorded March 7 th, 2008
th, 2008. Signed by a Ms Topaka Love who purports herself as “assistant
Secretary” who “personally appeared”
for signature somewhere in Minnesota and that
the document was prepared by Plaintiff’s Counsel LERNER, SAMPSON &
ROTHFUSS in Cincinnati, Ohio. Mortgage was assigned from Option One to Wells
Fargo Bank for
NO CONSIDERATION. Contract Law states there is no value
established unless there is a “meeting of the minds and consideration is passed”, again,
no legal contract is established, as no “consideration” has been passed.
In Conclusion, Plaintiff’s own exhibits prove so many irregularities and illegalities that unless each and every one is “proved”, then the Plaintiff Wells Fargo Bank can NOT be deemed the “Holder in Due Course” of the subject Mortgage and Promissory Note and in fact do represent more a meeting of men in Stuttgart Germany which resulted in the formation of the Nazi party OR a meeting of men in Polarmo that resulted in the formation of the Mafia, more than it resembles the actions taken by any Government regulated Corporations in America today.
It' still in rough draft!