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
A Citizen

Originally Posted By bwehn:
Can someone please explain to me just what this really means to the average home owner?


Almost nothing. Mortgages (esp. subprimes) are typically bundled up and sold to investor trusts. One of the investor trusts tried to bring a series of foreclosure actions but couldn't produce documents showing that the mortgages and notes were assigned from the original lender to the trust. They just need to find the paperwork and bring the foreclosure action again. If for some reason they lost the paperwork, it really won't stop the process because the original lender is usually contractually bound to help out the trusts and they can just bring the original lender in as a party to the foreclosure action. It allowed these homeowners to stay in their homes an extra month and costs the trusts some attorney fees. It's not that big a deal.

source
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=641314&page=1
Quote 0 0
A Citizen

Originally Posted By bwehn:
Can someone please explain to me just what this really means to the average home owner?


As everyone else has said, means nothing. It will take the bank all of 10 mins to track down the assignments at the courthouse. However, it will take months to get back into the courthouse.


 Posted :: 11/19/2007 10:32:52 AM
source

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=641314&page=1

Awwww that would be great, "In a Wallgreen's world"...
They must first cover up that the loan is on SEVERAL DIFFERENT books, and with SEVERAL DIFFERENT entities, AT THE SAME TIME.
Fun times, huh?
THE TRUTH WILL COME OUT!!!!!!!!!
Quote 0 0
I disagree with you. What should be an easy task isn't. How do I know? I've tried since February 2005 for them to come clean with information.
 
I've done several posts about my situation. Which started in approx 10/05. I fell behind on a second mortgage and in Jan 06 tried to rectify it. As like everyone else in life I've always been a hard working citizen of this country. I've not been one to just give up because my life wasn't picture perfect. While I've made errors I tried desperately to be the person to pay my bills regardless of what I would go without just to make sure if my credit was pulled there would be no reason to disqualify me and make it seem like I didn't attempt to be responsible about my financial matters.
 
To my own horror when I tried to get reinstatement figures they never came. As a note owner can only provide this information not a servicer.  And I'll be the last one to pay anyone if I can't identify who owns my legal debt obligation.  Who wants to pay a debt twice? Not me.
 
So in June 06 what I found out when they tried to foreclose is  the servicer had no clue who they were trying to foreclose for. Therefore I was able to get my foreclosure sale stopped.
 
While this was kinda a blessing in one way its been a nightmare in others. As when they tried to foreclose they actually filed things in county records which are untrue.
 
I can't sell my home. Well I guess I could if I would settle with the attorneys. But if they don't know who owns why give them a dime and let them off the hook? They've not only filed a wrongful foreclosure action they went as far to file two false proof of claims in banko court which was filed in 10/06.
 
It's not like they didn't know I got foreclosure sale stopped for them not knowing who owns my debt yet the judge has let them off with over $1m in false proof of claims being filed. Nothing nada zip! As filing a false proof of claim in banko ct is suppose to carry a $500,000 penalty and they tried twice to do such.
 
So to me the banko was brought on by them. I thought the banko court would help bring everything to light. Here's a wake up call. The courts operate under "COLOR OF LAW" NOT "COMMON LAW". This means that they SEEM TO OPERATE LEGITIMATELY. BUT they DON'T. It's all make believe. Especially if you end up in a bad situation like the one I've faced with employment issues. ( The issue arose from an employer lying about their ability to sell mortgage notes when I took my job. The way I found out they never had it in their contract to sell mortgage notes was when they took $80,000 from an investor for purchase of some notes. This was only found out because a former co worker didn't follow the law in attempting to do the difficult job of being a collector and some how a mortgagor actually got info to the president of said bank.  Needless to say they started playing dodge ball with the investor and the attorney that represented her. And they wanted to just give her money back. Which she wasn't happy with as they carried an overall value of $300-$500k. Yes I'm one of the people that did such a job. But the only reason I was successful in keeping my job is that I did what most don't the legal way. By being honest with people. By having compassion. By giving them a break if they showed initiative to rectify matters voluntarily. I always knew if they had any capability to pay me before I called. I knew what I was up against from the word go. I had files pulled from my office if I was informed they had something worked out with the bank already regardless of my boss just telling me to COLLECT THE MONEY. I  listened for years to the hard-luck stories. Guess I should of went to LAW SCHOOL. Cause now I'm dumbfounded anymore! As I was raised by peers who always TOLD ME HONESTY IS THE BEST POLICY. What will also be interesting if they get me in court is I actually collected for my 1st mortgage company when I had the JOB I had. I can tell the horror stories of how they'd place an account in collections knowing they had already filed bankruptcy when they placed it with us. Which when someone files BK and the house is sold for back taxes they'd want me to call the person who filed bk so they could get them to sign something because in their own negligence they never sent things to the county so they could be paid. TOTALLY ILLEGAL!! Even though I always tried to be thorough sometimes until you reach the person that was suppose to be responsible you don't always get the full story. Another word of advice is this... Judge Boyko also cracked down on them as mentioned in the article because if a home goes to foreclosure and the bank doesn't file proper paperwork to put into their name at end of foreclosure it stays in the homeowners name. Which means  They're still sitting there making money by not filing things with the securities office once again. So Citi is not better than Ameriquest. And well most of the collection agencies that collect for any of these people could give a rats ass about anyone else. Only their paycheck. While yes collectors make bonuses on what they collect in a third party agency THERE'S STILL A RIGHT WAY TO COLLECT AND A WRONG WAY TO COLLECT A DEBT. And I know I'm one of few and far in between who can give names of debtors I still know who'll tell you I was the BEST COLLECTOR THEY EVER KNEW. NOT BECAUSE I ATTEMPTED TO SCAM ANYONE OR BE OVERLY HARDCORE but because I treated them the same way I would want to be treated. I put my pants on the same way hopefully as anyone else and no one is insignificant in gods world regardless of their financial circumstances. Although several people want to overlook this fact of life. It was the only way to take pride in the job I had. Seriously where else does anyone get to know people on a national basis? A song comes to mind...You've got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away and know when to run. You never count your money when your sitting at the table as there will be time for counting when the dealings done.
They get by with only showing only a copy of the deed of trust. Nothing like common law would allow. This is why so many people are losing their homes. Some judges actually do things just but mine hasn't. Neither has my attorney.
 
He knew what was up from the word go why we were filing. Said he'd take care of it. For me I can only accept a sit-down job. Unless I have another operation that could possibly make me end up in a wheelchair unable to walk. And jobs for my skills that pay what my former employer paid are out of state.
Which now I may get by with making less as my hubby now makes more than he ever has. However, its to much to little to late.
 
My attorney wants me to forget about now knowing that we were scammed and lied to about 1st mortgage as well now that I know.
 
They now claim they may modify my loan. To try and cover up what they've done on that one but why let them off the hook? As it still won't clear up the second mortgage that was initially the issue. So they get by with creating a cloud on title and still get to attempt to harass me with a foreclosure action on my 1st. I actually had the law firm that's foreclosing for my 1st tell me that they'll try to notify the lender that's been proven not to own my debt.  Even though they have full knowledge of my case and I even paid to have judges decree filed in county records. Just so in case they did a title search like their suppose to they'd see what's been proven in court already. As the state statutes for my state dictate that they have to notify all lien-holders on title. Well how can they if the people they got my note assigned from won't prove who owns?

So now I'm told I have to clear this up in State court. Which a cloud on title references this as well. But to me why State Ct when I'm already in Federal Ct?

I've been monitoring another bankruptcy case where the same thing has happened in MA. An attorney there has done what mine promised for almost 6 months here in MO.

The other thing is this that your not getting about the Oh case.  

This court order is what I have been saying in my cases. This is rampant fraud on every court in America or nonjudicial foreclosure fraud where the securitized trusts are filing foreclosures when they never own/hold the mortgage loan at the commencement of the foreclosure.

That means that the loans are clearly in default at the time of any eventual transfer of the ownership of the mortgage loans to the trusts. (THEY'RE CREATING THE DEFAULT)This means that the loans are being held by the originating lenders after the alleged "sale" to the trust despite what it says per the pooling and servicing agreements and despite what the securities laws require.

This also means that many securitized trusts don't really, legally own these bad loans.(To me this is incorrect. When I refinanced my credit score was 650 the best you can get is 800. This if you ask me is if you are fortunate enough to have parents pay for everything. Have your own business that you've reaped a lot of financial gains. Or are like me someone who started at ground zero and worked day in out since you were of legal working age regardless of the job opportunities presented to you just to make yourself a responsible financial person in your adulthood.)

In many cases, many of the trusts try to argue equitable assignment that predates the filing of the foreclosure, but a securitized trust cannot take an equitable assignment of a mortgage loan. It also means that the securitized trusts own nothing.

So with this decision, it appears confirmed that investors in the mortgage debacle may in fact own nothing---not even the bad loans they funded! It seems their right to the cash flow from the underlying properties does not extend to ownership of the properties themselves; thus clouding the recovery picture considerably. Ed your right! Can we shoot Mr. Brantley yet?


Which also reverts to something like this.

Promissory Notes, with respect to a mortgage, and it is
similar for credit cards, are securities once signed by the
"borrower."

The bank then sells the Note, usually for a gov't bond,
and records the gov't bond proceeds as cash on their
books. Gov't bonds permit the bank to create what is
called "checkbook money," and put this into a "transaction
account" from which the bank issues a check to pay the
seller of the property.

The "borrower" provided his/her signature that gave value
to the Note. The bank paid the seller with "checkbook
money," which is not the same as money.

When you check your coat somewhere and receive a
"coat check," it represents your coat, but it is NOT your
coat.

The same with "checkbook money." It represents the
deposit of the value the "borrower" provided. Without
the Note, the bank cannot "create" the "checkbook money."

A check is NOT money. A check represents money.

The value of the borrower's signature represents future
labor/earnings. That is the borrower's consideration.
The "borrower" provides his/her signature in expectation
of receiving a loan of money.

He/she never receives a loan of money. He/she receives
a check representing imaginary money. The bank has
breached the contract.

The original Note is important to show that it was altered
after the "borrower" signed it, without the "borrower's"
knowledge, authorization, or permission.

Further, because the bank sold the Note to raise the
asset to back the creation of "checkbook money" PRIOR
to making an alleged loan, the bank stole the Note.

No bank can own a Note unless it gives value as
consideration. Without actually owning the Note, the
bank is not legally able to sell it.

Check the Note. Nowhere in the Note terms does it give the
bank permission to do what it immediately does after obtaining
one's signature.

Without that signature, without that Note, the bank cannot
lend a dime. In fact, the bank never does lend a dime, or
even a single penny. It lends checkbook money.

Check the Note. The "borrower" signed on for a loan of
MONEY.

Check the Note: "In return for a loan that I have
received, I promise to pay US$xxx,xxx.xx....

"a" loan?

"a" is an indefinite article, unspecific. Why not the loan,
for US$xxx,xxx.xx that "I" am agreeing to repay.

Makes me wonder, what is "a" loan? It must not be "THE"
loan "I" thought "I" was getting according to the terms of the
agreement.

Turns out, that is true. It wasn't.



Best not to allege fraud. Fraud is much harder to prove,
and the burden of proof shifts back to you. As was already
pointed out, Breach of Contract is the way to go.

No judge, no bank, and no bank attorney will just roll over
and not put up a fight. Most people do not fully understand
the process and procedures for holding the bank's feet
to the fire.

Who provided the asset that funded the loan? Surely,
not the bank.

All mortgages, and all credit cards are based upon this form
of breach of contract, constructive fraud.

The bank sells the Note for a gov't bond, let's use $100,000.00
as an example. Now the bank has a $100,000.00 asset on its books.

Using that, it "creates" ANOTHER $100,000.00 in a
"transaction account," from which it issues a "check" of
imaginary money to pay the seller and demand repayment
from you.

Eventually, you repay $100,000.00, plus another $200,000.00,
in interest over the life of the loan.

The bank got all the $100,000.00 of "checkbook money"
it loaned. But wait! Wait about the original $100,000.00
the bank received when it "sold" your Note?

Icing on the cake, wouldn't you say?

The bank loaned zero money and got back about $200,000.00, plus all that interest.

What was the stated rate of interest on the "loan?"
Seems like infinity to me, regardless of what is stated.

"Uh, Mr Banker, from whose account was that check issued
to pay the seller? I don't have any account with you."

So many questions.

I started a thread, "Follow The Money" about the Fed
stealing this country blind. The above is a perfect example
of how it is done.

I haven't seen too many people upset enough to do anything
about it.



So now to get back to the financial credibility I once had I feel like I have a couple of options. Do case in State court Pro Se. Make sure somehow its done on the common law venue. And file a chp 7 so my credit score will enhance faster. Or possibly file for LIBEL REVIEW AGAINST ALL MY CREDITORS.

I never intended to miss my 2nd note pymt. But as I said earlier life is not picture perfect always. If anyone has any good insight to those of you here who know me please advise how to file the proper proceedings in court. Or if you have better advice for me than I've been able to come up with!
 
God Bless and Many Thanks!!!!
Quote 0 0
Ed Cage
Good post Kathy!
And a great formula of telling the truth and perseverance.

As to your quote here:
"Ed your right! Can we shoot Mr. Brantley yet?"

Kathy the time is drawing near for aach mortgage fraud
criminal James Brantley of AMC and now Citi Residential to
be brought to justice.

I predict Citi Residential will fail in early 2008 just as AMC failed
in 2007.. Both in no small part due to criminal schemes by
James Brantley. Currently his "corporate protection" by AMC
and ACC* protects him from direct action by thousands of fraud
victims whose lives Brantley has affected.
 
     I expect that the "corporate veil" protection that James
Brantley relies on so heavily will sharply diminish in early 2008
for a multitude of reasons. I warned him in October of this year
that if he had ever been convicted of a similar mortgage crime
that he would have a hard time staying out of jail this time
around.  Brantley declined to answer my question as to
whether he had ever been in trouble regarding mortgage fraud
in the past or had a "criminal record."

Kathy I am at your service if there is anything I can do for you
in the role of a layman.

It says here, 2008 will be a much different year.
Ed Cage  /  ecagetx@tx.rr.com  /  972-596-4363
 
* In fairness it must be noted that ACC Chief Legal Counsel Eileen
Rubens has been both responsive and highly professional in her
ongoing dialog with me.. This is a two way street.. When the “other
side” does a credible job as Ms. Rubens has to date, we must and
should recognize it.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...