Mortgage Servicing Fraud
occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity.
Articles |The FORUM |Law Library |Videos | Fraudsters & Co. |File Complaints |How they STEAL |Search MSFraud |Contact Us
I am not sure that homeowners are the people to be suing MERS; I think counties and cities should sue them for millions of $$$ in lost recording fee revenues. In this case, when government loses, we all lose (who do you think gets their taxes raised to make up the shortfall? Yep, ALL of us!)

Anyway, the outcome seems to in no way address the fact that MERS cloaks the true note holders throughout many sales of the note. MERS may be taking possession of the note in order to foreclose, but their shield will absolutely keep any homeowner from making progress in preforeclosure. MERS knows the owner, but evidently MERS doesn't tell the borrower; it waits until it can do the foreclosure itself. Yep, MERS discloses at signing that it is involved, but does anyone buying a first home know what that can mean later on when the stuff hits the fan? I doubt it.

A section of interest to all:

"When borrowers sign a mortgage contract naming MERS as the mortgagee, they are assigning their rights, title and interest in the property to MERS.

Promissory notes resulting from mortgages are recorded in real estate records. Most lenders sell the notes on the secondary mortgage market, often to government-sponsored entities like Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mae, which then resell the notes in the mortgage-backed securities market.

Since MERS remains the mortgagee of record, there are no additional recording fees each time the notes change hands. The fees are commonly $10 to $15 per transaction.

Arnold noted the electronic process eliminates the possibility of mistakes being made during paperwork processing." (Hahahahahaha; whew, let me wipe the tears from my eyes on this one)

A lot of counties are losing a lot of fees when these notes are sold. And a lot of cities and counties are cleaning and mowing properties without knowing where to send the bill for those services. Does MERS pay those bills?

Anyway, too bad the plaintiffs did not ask here; we could have suggested many additional complaints to add to their suit. MERS damages everyone, not just one or two borrowers.

On a brighter note, MERS volume is down. Maybe they will sink with the rest of the pond scum MERS calls "clients".

Quote 0 0
Nye Lavalle
Add Condo associations not being paid HOA fees and assessments by MERS!
Quote 0 0
A local level politician stopped my house last week with a petition for me to sign.

I like her.  When she gets something stuck in her mind, that's going to get handled.

I asked if she had ever heard of MERS.  Nope.

I let her know we are not collecting fees we would otherwise be entitled to if not for MERS interference with the public recording in changes on the deed.

They place themselves between the mortgage industry and the county,
city and when we want to send a bill to the owner of a property that is vacant, not maintained or being used for a crack house or gang hang out,
we end up paying for it out of our taxes.

We have thousands of houses that have been abandoned in our area which includes Buffalo and Niagara Falls.  The demolition schedule is backed up
for several years.

Our college grad people leave the area because the job market is so bad and that breaks up the family units and everybody that leaves, takes their taxes elsewhere and their votes elsewhere.

I don't see why hiding who the actual noteholder is, isn't criminal or else MERS should step up and pay the fees and bills from the city and county
to maintain their abandoned houses.

I'm going to follow up with her in a few more weeks.  I've tried to get other
local reps to get interested but nothing and nada.

Buffalo can't manage their own finances and has a control board oversight.
I'm thinking any money they are not collecting because of MERS ought to be paid my MERS with penalties.

Otherwise, MERS should not be able to hide the noteholder and assist them
from the noteholders responsibilities here and elsewhere.

I say forward the bills and if they are not paid, sue them for it.

Quote 0 0
The case, by the way, was Trent et al v. MERS in United States District Court, Middle District, Jacksonville Division, Case No. "3.06-cv-00374-TJC-HTS".  I have most of the pleadings in digital form.

It is important to remember to LEARN from our mistakes!

If anyone is litigating with MERS, they should be READING the pleadings and opinions in the key MERS cases.

Recent federal pleadings, motions and related filings are generally accessible via PACER (to registered users for a small fee):

But I would be happy to SHARE copies of these pleadings with participants who are reciprocally HELPING OTHERS on this message board.  I will RESERVE posting any critical commentary regarding the pleadings and the decision until AFTER any appeals are resolved and finally disposed of.  

Quote 0 0
O -


File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
Kumar Corp. v. Nopal Lines, Ltd., 462 So. 2d 1178,. 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). Here, MERS’s counsel explained to the trial judge at the hearing that, in ...,%202007/2D05-4544.pdf - Similar pages
Quote 0 0

No Slide Title need to read

Quote 0 0
O -

No Slide Title

File Format: Unrecognized - View as HTML
Registration vs. Recording. MERS is not a system of legal record nor a replacement for the public land ... Status of foreclosing in MERS name in Florida. ... - Similar pages


File Format: Unrecognized - View as HTML
(c) In the State of Florida, the authority to conduct ... (v) The Member shall report to MERS the initiation of foreclosure of any mortgage loan registered ... - Similar pages
Quote 0 0
From the "No Slide Title" document:

"Registration vs. Recording. MERS is not a system of legal record nor a replacement for the public land records. Mortgages must be recorded in the county land records.

MERS is a tracking system. No interests are transferred on the MERS® System, only tracked."

From the document above:

"When borrowers sign a mortgage contract naming MERS as the mortgagee, they are assigning their rights, title and interest in the property to MERS."

These statements appear to be in direct opposition to each other, meaning that some judges may rule one way and some judges may rule another. Both judges thus may claim to be right.

There are people at this forum who can attest that multiple transfer recordings are NOT being done in the courthouses of this nation, leading to mass confusion for everybody. Only MERS knows by the end, and it doesn't tell.

Let's hear it for "MULTIPLE CHOICE LAW" where judges can make decisions according to their own interests or beliefs AND STILL BE RIGHT...Huzzah!

So much for appeals and all that. Everybody would be better served to check out where the financial interests of the judges lies. Judges often fail to disclose a conflict and recuse themselves when it would be proper for them to do so. Every state has a mechanism in place to obtain any judges financial statements, yet it is rarely used. Perhaps it is time for interested parties to do so. The results can be enlightening.
Quote 0 0
O -
this one is good reading, It's hard to tell who won?
Capital Bank v. MVB, Inc., 644 So.2d 515, 519-521 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Constructive Fraud. Florida law recognizes an equitable cause of action for ... - 76k - Cached - Similar pages
You might want to check out MERS regarding predatory lending, Like v. MERS PREDATORY lending court dates.
No. 179: Matter of Merscorp, Inc. v Romaine
In the MERS system, the mortgagor is notified of transfers of servicing .... from liability and further that it encourages predatory lending practices. ... - 33k - Cached - Similar pages
Quote 0 0

I want to call EVERYONE's particular attention to the item on PAGE 1 of the opinion in MERS v. Azize, Case No. 2D05-4544, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 2418; 32 Fla. L. Weekly D 546 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) posted by "O", above (,%202007/2D05-4544.pdf ), which says:

"No appearance for Appellees."


The MERS v. Azize case was LOST by DEFAULT after MERS SETTLED with those parties with the energy and resources to continue and then took a default appellate ruling against the rest!  Bear in mind that a number of the cases on appeal in Azize were dismissed sua sponte by Judge Walt LOGAN.  So some of these defendants had previously WON in District Court without showing up.

MERS SHOWED UP in force in this 2nd District Court, bringing with him amicus curiae briefs from FNMA, FHLMC, the MBA, Chase Home Finance and Countrywide.  April CHARNEY filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of the appellees, but the appellees did NOT APPEAR themselves. 

* * *

There is one particularly important lesson to take from the Florida appellate cases.  This is the NECESSITY of preparing well thought out and well argued pleadings and briefs in the trial court to ESTABLISH a good appellate record!  Judge Walt LOGAN ruled sua sponte after witnessing ongoing egregious conduct by attorneys suing in MERS' name.  But trial court judges do NOT show up at appellate arguments to defend their decisions.

While it is admirable that April CHARNEY and Jacksonville Area Legal Aid filed a brief, this is NOT an adequate substitution for the real party in interest APPEARING by counsel in an appellate setting.


But something else happened as a consequence of the Florida litigation.  FNMA figured out that suing in MERS' name was legal quicksand and has now PROHIBITED the practice nationally for FNMA loans!
Quote 0 0
Nye Lavalle
Fannie stopped [for then] after a special counsel was appointed due to my reports to the board of the ciminality occuring there. The special counsel agreed with me that the practices of th FLA foreclosure bar were major problems, wrong and perhaps criminal! FYI

However, what I have pushed for and will continue to push is for Fannie not to "approve" any firm, servicer, etc... that uses these practices, whether a Fannie loan or not!

Can't wait till these crooks finally get their accounting straight and hold an annual meeting which has not occured in MANY years.
Quote 0 0

Also, BRAVO to ALL for moving back to a substantive discussion of the law and the issues.  I DO think that when we post information we are readily able to SHARE, including appropriate commentary on past cases, that we are building a helpful resource for MSF victims!

Quote 0 0

Thank you for elevating this matter to FNMA's senior management!  GOOD WORK!  I am certain that you are correct that FNMA has a LOT of leverage with FNMA Seller/Servicers.  I think that such pressure could be influential and even decisive with smaller lenders and servicers.  But the very largest lenders and servicers are probably TOO BIG to be disciplined by FNMA alone.

I am inclined to think that in the end market discipline rather than regulatory discipline will prevail with respect to MERS.

That is, some really capable plaintiff's class action law firm is going to bring a successful RICO suit against MERS and then MERS' management will be CANNED!  The firm is really thinly capitalized and will NOT be able to afford an adverse verdict.

But it appears to me that the class action suits brought to date have focused on the WRONG ISSUES.

By market discipline, I ALSO include suits by mortgage securities purchasers for breaches of covenants appearing within the registration statements for securities registered with the SEC and sold on Wall Street.  When Wall Street turns on MERS, that firm is going to be stepped on like a very small insect!

As to regulatory discipline, MERS has enormous exposure on the Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) issue.  But the UPL actions can be most successfully prosecuted by state bar associations or others vested with UPL enforcement responsibility. 
Quote 0 0
There is a RICO suit against MERS, Fidelity and HSBC in the Southern District in New York. Can send you a copy of complaint if you like. Email me for it. Also, you have to understand that Wall Street CREATED MERS so it could hide the real parties in interest of the notes and avoid assignee liability.

Bear Stearns and Merrill Lynch along with Fannie, Freddie, HSBC, First American, the title industry and many others are not only MEMBERS of MERS, BUT OWN MERS and the shares in MERSCORP!

As for the issues with illiterate members of this board, I have been here since the inception. They don't see the work I do since I chose long ago to help the masses rather than the asses. Like you so eloquently put it, I can't practice law and have to deal with competent counsel who can put up

I don't know what some expect, but look at the posts on here as well as the docs I've provided for downloads and no one other than jack and I have done more for this cause since it's inception. To have morons come and attack those who try to help EVERYONE not just ONE person is a crime in itself!

I coined the terms predatory mortgage servicing and predatory mortgage securitization and variations thereof long before law professors, congress, regulators et al. used the terms [a google search will show how often used today]. The use of the terms [from a 1999 report I authored and presented to consumer law conference] is a CLEAR indication of who first exposed these crimes and who first brought to the attention of legal scholars etc.

In fact, in 2000, I was one of first to expose MERS and those at the annual NCLC conference didn't know what I was talking about. Judge Gordon in his questions to MERS in his sua sponte hearing uses Ms. Nye and Mrs. Pew [both me] and my posts on the website of MERS asking questions. I have a lengthy affidavit also prepared for MERS. Be more than happy to provide you with a telephone deposition as well as to my communications with MERS and their lawyers as well as executives including CEO and Gen Counsel.

We had a good Forbes article the other week as well you should use...

This is what I do to help as many as possible. Most of what we do is "stealth" and we only expose after public filing to help others.

Quote 0 0
While I certainly do NOT disagree that Wall Street bears culpability in the creation of MERS, Wall Street is a term that includes a LOT of players with a LOT of interests.  To the extent that BUYERS of mortgage securities find that they are LOSING money -- e.g. the subprime mortgage market meltdown -- class action attorneys for investors will seek to find a basis to ascribe responsibility to recover losses.

To a very large extent Wall Street exists to mediate flows of capital.  There are sources of capital (e.g. pension funds) and uses of capital (e.g. corporate equity and debt markets, incuding venture capital, as well as the mortgage debt markets).  As you well know, the mortgage debt markets are ENORMOUS.

While Wall Street may have found MERS to be a convenience when it served as a shield, obscuring ownership.  Diverse interests on Wall Street will turn on MERS in an instant when looking for someone to BLAME for investment losses!  I realize that these interests turning on MERS does nothing to directly help victims of MSF, but I believe that it WILL very quickly bring the MERS foreclosure mill to a CLOSE.

And here we part company somewhat as to our respective beliefs about the paradigm of MERS' operations.  I think that MERS' core business as an electronic registration facility may have some merit as a legitimate business model.  And I believe that MERS has been drawn into a criminal conspiracy to CONCEAL debt ownership and OBSTRUCT JUSTICE, by lending its name and delegating corporate authority to its members, while failing to properly SUPERVISE these members.

So while I see MERS as a participant in ongoing criminal activity, it appears to me that MERS COULD wake up, smell the coffee and get TOTALLY OUT OF THE FORECLOSURE BUSINESS.  And I think that they almost certainly WILL do this within the next 24 months.  The real question is whether management is going to do this voluntarily BEFORE further damage to the enterprise or whether in clinging to a FALSE and CRIMINAL business model, senior management is going to go DOWN WITH THE SHIP.

From what I peceive, you appear to view the MERS senior management as much more willing and aggressive partners in the criminal enterprise and seem to view the existence of this organization as for the PURPOSE of such criminal enterprise.  (Pardon me if I am misinterpreting or misascribing your views.  I am simply describing my own impressions garnered from your posts, etc.  Please take no offense if I am mistaken.)

I may very well ultimately come around to your way of thinking if MERS continues to CLING to a business model that includes ongoing false representations to courts and perpetration of illegal activites!  It is my impression that MERS is about to get nailed between the eyes by regulatory enforement activity, in addition to increasing and costly litigation.  The actions of MERS within the next six to twelve months ought to show whether the criminal involvement is incidental or intentional! 
Quote 0 0
Nye Lavalle
The whole key Bill is Transparency! No one wants it. MERS and the other opaque veils have been created to hide a system that in essence an unregulated and world-wide "Universal Reserve" and bank.

It's like the Fed, but in this new "Universal Reserve" it's a method of electronic digits. It is only when people or investors in recent weeks go to "cash out" the digits, when all hell breaks loose and you have "runs on the banks." Year ago you used to get a stock certificate that said you owed X shares in XYZ company. You used to have title insurance and a PUBLIC RECORD.

With no PUBLIC records and not stock certificates [yes virutally ALL stock companies are moving to NO paper] all ANYONE has is digits. Once assets are digitized, ANYONE can manipulate and there is no PAPER trail. The Wall St. firms are behind this "wealth extraction" method and have been playing it for years.

I can go on... but I think you get the idea. MERS was patterned after the Depository Trust Corp and CEDE & Co.. google both for some interesting info...

Quote 0 0
So while I see MERS as a participant in ongoing criminal activity, it appears to me that MERS COULD wake up, smell the coffee and get TOTALLY OUT OF THE FORECLOSURE BUSINESS. And I think that they almost certainly WILL do this within the next 24 months. The real question is whether management is going to do this voluntarily BEFORE further damage to the enterprise or whether in clinging to a FALSE and CRIMINAL business model, senior management is going to go DOWN WITH THE SHIP.

In reviewing older posts, I thought this prediction by Mr. Roper in August 2007 was rather interesting.  Mr. Roper was wrong about how long MERS continued to cling to direct involvement in foreclosures.  MERS didn't completely exit the foreclosure business until early this year.

But Mr. Roper still predicted that development in August 2007!
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...