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
William A. Roper, Jr.
The Palm Beach Post gives us a nice rundown on the explosive new deposition of Georgia Notary Public Cheryl Denise THOMAS formerly of DOCX:

Palm Beach Post: “Surrogate signers” signed countless foreclosure documents - with someone else’ name by Christine Stapleton (March 30, 2011)

http://blogs.palmbeachpost.com/realtime/2011/03/30/surrogate-signers-signed-countless-foreclosure-documents-with-someone-else-name/


The deposition is an informative read:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/51885547/Deposition-of-Cheryl-Thomas-March-23-2011


Quote 0 0

Mr. Roper,

As you know DocX is near and dear to my heart, NOT. I saw this deposition on-line this afternoon and was seriously confused.

OK, so, someone at DocX is given authority to sign as an officer. This is one of the biggest controversies of LPS and its group of cronies behind creating documents out of thin air. So after I get my head around that idea I read this and fall deeper into the rabbit hole. The robo-perjure has the ability to extend the bulls*** rights bestowed upon them by the mega bank to anyone they choose?

If I were at the beginning of my case I would sure spend the extra money to put the signers from DocX on notice in my situation. I would not only demand that they prove they had authority to sign for my lender, I would want any log or record of anyone with authority to sign for them. I would want to know if they actually signed or did some other 3rd or 4th party sign in place of them and furthermore I would like to know if they even worked the day my doc’s were recreated.  

So many unanswered questions, so many retards to confuse us all. By the language used in the deposition, she does not seem to be packing a full lunch. Probably the perfect moron for one of these legalized booking houses.

Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.

Quote:
JF said:

The robo-perjure has the ability to extend the bulls*** rights bestowed upon them by the mega bank to anyone they choose?

 

In general, a person can authorize another person to sign on their behalf.  This is a matter of informal agency.  It happens every day.  A USPS certified mail item or another delivery arrives by mail.  A businessman dictates a letter and asks that his secretary sign his name, etc.

 

What distinguishes the robo-forgeries assignments is (a) the authority conferred by many powers of attorneys is personal and often under the power's express terms cannot be further delegated, (b) the document being signed is a document expressly controlled by the statute of frauds of most jurisdictions for which ONLY a written power of attorney can confer authority, and (c) the notary laws of essentially ALL jurisdictions expressly preclude a notary from authentication of a signature without actually witnessing the signature of the signer.

 

One can quibble a little about whether the signature of the person executing the document is a forgery under the laws of a particular jurisdiction.  But the signatures of the witnesses and of the notary are unquestionably false attestations.  What does it mean to WITNESS something?

 

The witness is attesting to the fact that the signer personally appeared and signed.  That is also what the authentication of the notary attests.

 

But also note that an otherwise invalid execution can often be made good by a subsequent ratification.  See my prior message thread:

 

"Agency, Powers, Principal and Agent" (03/13/11 at 04:59 AM)

http://ssgoldstar.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=5136472

 

As I have pointed out previously, it is better to focus on the economic realities of the assignment forgery.  And in failing to depose the signer, you are putting yourself at an extreme disadvantage.  The assignment fails because it describes a transaction which never took place.  The questions relating to authority are ancilliary.

 

Quote:
JF said:

So many unanswered questions, so many retards to confuse us all. By the language used in the deposition, she does not seem to be packing a full lunch. Probably the perfect moron for one of these legalized booking houses.

 

The robo-forgery and robo-perjury mills necessarily rely upon compliant, but not so bright employees who can be relied upon to follow instructions, including instructions that the employees perform illegal acts on behalf of the criminal enterprise.

 

Quote 0 0
I always thought that if someone signed another person's name (with express permission) the signer had to place their own initials to the right and below of the signature.  This way it is know to all that that the real person did not sign the letter or document and it would be known to all who did.
Quote 0 0
William A. Roper, Jr.
Quote:
Way To Go said:

I always thought that if someone signed another person's name (with express permission) the signer had to place their own initials to the right and below of the signature.  This way it is know to all that that the real person did not sign the letter or document and it would be known to all who did.

 
Way To Go:
 
While there MIGHT be some state law or cases somewhere that suggest that this is required, I am unaware of any (though I haven't researched the subject).
 
What you describe is certainly the better practice.
 
There are two conventional ways to sign on behalf of another with transparency.  For example, suppose that John Smith has orally authorized me to sign on his behalf.
 
I might sign:
 

William A. Roper, Jr. [signed]

for John Smith

 
Or, I might sign:
 

John Smith [signed]

by William A. Roper, Jr. [or alternatively initials "by W.A.R."]

 
Whether this is legally necessary, it seems to me to be a good idea for the protection of the signer.
 
That is, if I simply sign John Smith's name and Smith later denies that he orally authorized me to do so, it seems that such a signature could be taken as a criminal forgery.  While I could argue that Smith had authorized me to sign, which would seem to be a pretty good defense, where is my proof?  It is my word against Smith and if Smith is dishonest or disreputable (or if Smith simply has a bad memory) I might have a criminal charge hanging in the balance.
 
Using one of the forms above would seem to rather clearly show that I have no intent to deceive anyone.
 
*
 
Where I am acting under a power of attorney, I would tend to use one of these forms slightly altered:
 

William A. Roper, Jr. [signed]

attorney in fact for John Smith

 
Or, I might sign:
 

John Smith [signed]

by William A. Roper, Jr., attorney in fact

 

Where a written instrument subject to the statute of frauds is signed, usually the power of attorney would also need to be recorded ahead of the executed instrument.

 

By contrast, when someone is signing as an officer of a corporation, usually presentation of the corporate resolution is NOT required.  This is one reason that you see the robo-forgers using the pretext that they are Vice Presidents or Asst. Secretaries of the grantor.  By claiming to be an officer, they usually do not need to present and record the authorizing resolution except when ordered by a court to do so. 

 

*

 

BE SURE TO CHECK THE LAW AND CASES FOR YOUR JURISDICTION! The above analysis is NOT LEGAL ADVICE, but rather is based upon the LAY opinion of a non-lawyer, but based upon a lifetime of business experience.

Quote 0 0

You can never sign anothers name, if that person has given you the power of attorney, you would sign your name with POA after it. No notary can notorize unless that person that signed is in front of notary.

 

My thought is that the people signing all these bogus assignments, even if authorize, have no idea what they are transferring or even if who they are assigning it from and to has( lawful rights) authority to do so..  Obviously, the fraud must continue or it would have been halted by now.

Quote 0 0
I used to "sign" checks at a job I had years ago.  I had a signature stamp.  The signature stamp was ordered through the bank and there were only 2 people who had a stamp.  However, our stamps were different.  They were multi colored and you could tell whether it was my stamp or the other person's stamp by the difference in the color spectrum.

We only signed checks.  Well maybe a few letters but that was it.  The person whose signature we had, knew exactly what we were signing as everything was authorized through them.

When you give someone authorization to sign on your behalf, it's supposed to be for specific purposes.  Not random sh**.  Ya know?

I don't know what the laws are, but for some reason I felt inclined to comment on this post.....lol
I would have NEVER just signed something random.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...