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 had been in Forclosure for 3 years and had not paid a dime in that time. In June my Foreclosure case was dismissed by the Judge. I understand and I am being told by Wells Fargo that I do not owe them any money and I own my house free and clear. I now want to obtain my Title/Deed Satisfaction letter from Wells Fargo or I need to get the Title/Deed in my name without the lein. Wells Fargo is refusing to provide me with the Satisfaction Letter. What are my options?

Quote 0 0

What state are you in?

Quote 0 0

This post is probably merely a come on by one of a number of swindlers who sometimes visit this site and use fake posts as a pretext for establishing communications with distressed borrowers to peddle so coalled "debt elimination scams".  Note that "Chris" has included an e-mail link.  Those corresponding with Chris will perhaps soon hear that Chris has discovered a "sure thing", a program from one of a number of well known swindlers to completely eliminate his mortgage debt through a "quiet title" action.

If "Chris" is real and he has actually obtained a final dismissal of his or her case, Chris could safely post the specifics.  But specifics will probably never be provided, because the number of cases which have resulted in a final dismissal with prejudice nationally is less than one hundred and almost all of these cases are celebrated.



IF the post is real, Chris should take a look at some of the prior posts by Mr. Roper, including within:


Is lack of standing the end of the case?


What is the reality of things?


Even if you win a dismissal with prejudice, you are probably NOT entitled to a release of lien.  Anyone telling you otherwise is probably trying to rip you off!

You can probably live in the house without having to make any further payments.  You can sell or lease the house or bequeath the house to your children.  But any buyer would have to accept the risk of the unreleased lien and probably cannot get title insurance or financing.  So you can probably only sell to a cash buyer and/or an attorney willing to accept the risk that he or she might have to defend the title.

There will be a cloud on the title for some time.  The cloud dissipates over time, depending upon other laws of your jurisdiction as to statutes of limitations, title by adverse possession, etc.  Limitations on a promissory note is usually six years under the UCC and under the laws of most states.  That is six years from the due date of any required payment or maturity, but can be advanced by acceleration.


Similarly, an adverse possession law helps.  For example, suppose that your state provides that an occupant of a property in notorious possession of the title of another for fifteen years is entitled to quiet title.  If a total stranger to the title is vested with title after fifteen years of occupancy, this would also tend to displace the lien in most places.


My point is that the dismissal gives you some peace.  The title is clouded.  You are NOT entitled to the release of the lien in ANY STATE unless the dismissal was due to a successful defense of payment, accord & satisfaction, release or some other similar actual discharge of the underlying indebtedness.  If it is only the remedy which is barred and the debt stands undischarged, no release is required.


After passage of more time, the title becomes stronger and the unreleased lien recedes into ancient history.


See also:


Some Florida "Clean Hands" Cases

Quote 0 0

By way of analogy, what do you think the effect would be of an unreleased lien from the Colonial period found within the title to your property?  For example, suppose the Governor John Winthup of Massachusetts had neglected to get a full written release of a mortgage on a tract of land granted in Boston in 1645 which has since been sold and subdivided numerous time over the last four and a half centuries.

Can someone foreclosure on the unreleased lien from the 1600s even if of record and undischarged?


The simple answer is "of course not"!


First, there would be a particularly robust equitable defense of laches.  Any plaintiff would also have a serious proof problem showing that it had succeeded to the valid right to enforce the unreleased lien.


There are probably several specific statutes that confirm an unchallenged title after passage of some time, etc. (i.e. adverse possession).


Sometimes, it is easier to understand an example by framing extremes.  It is pretty easy to see that a cloud dating to the 1600s is probably no cloud at all.  By contrast, the cloud arising from an unreleased lien in respect of an order of dismissal on the foreclosure suit is fairly opaque while the ink is still wet on the order.  The cloud begins to dissipate after the ink dries.


It is probably also noteworthy that in most places the title improves not only through the passage of time, but also as a result of bona fide arms length transactions for value.


So, for example, if Smith has a clouded title and sells the property for cash to Jones, Jones also has a clouded title, though possibly slightly less clouded.  Jones is on notice of the unreleased lien.  Now suppose that Jones remains in quiet possession for three years and then sells to Robinson.  Robinson gets a slightly better title.  This is because there is usually no specific period of years as to the application of laches.


But each subsequent purchaser is relying upon not merely time but the undisturbed possession and failure of the lienholder to seek to enforce the lien.


(This is particularly so after the maturity date shown within the written instrument.  That is, if the mortgage says that the balance was due in 1950, but no release was ever recorded, should I worry about the existence of this unreleased lien?  Common sense suggests that if the lienholder hasn't sought enforcement sixty years after stated maturity, that no enforcement is going to be sought or ever take place.  This tends to be true even absent some statutory provision vesting title after a certain number of years.(


The lienholder might somehow seek to enforce the lien against Smith some five or ten years later.  Smith may successfully defend pleading res judicata (the prior dismissal), limitations and laches.


Subsequent purchasers may have a less robust res judicata defense, but have an ever growing laches defense.  Would it be fair for the lienholder to sit on its hands through ten years and five purchasers and never seek to enforce its lien until Murphy has purchased the property from Robinson?


Usually, this is NOT a question as to when one has an absolute right of title in respect of the cloud.  Rather, it is an incremental problem.  The title gets better.  At some point, the title is strong enough that either a title insurer will insure without exception and/or a lender will finance in respect of the noted title exception.  It might be years.  It might be decades.  It might be a century.  But the owner remains vested with incidents of ownership and enjoyment of the property unless the lienholder can make out a case to dispossess. 

Quote 0 0

What Specifics do you want? I am in Sarasota, FL


Here is the link to my case through the Clerk of Court:



Do I need more Proof. I want to finally close the last piece of the puzzle. Please help. Any Advice???

Quote 0 0

@ KA   


I can also provide you with a copy of the dismissal through email if you would like to verify it for yourself. Please either email me directly or post you email address and I will follow up with you.



I also understand how you feel about the "fix everything" scam as I have been approached many many times about it. Thank you for your time.

Quote 0 0

The docket entries for the link shown do not reflect a dismissal.  Perhaps this order just hasn't been posted yet.

It isn't apparent from the docket either how or why the case was dismissed, unless it was voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiff.  If this is a voluntary dismissal, then this would typically be without prejudice to refiling unless in Florida the plaintiff had previously voluntarily dismissed the matter before.

The guidance given by ka seems right on.  If the case has been voluntarily dismissed, you mostly need to lay low.  There is at least some chance that the case gets lost in the crush of paperwork chaos in Florida or that the plaintiff screws up in some other way.

The very last thing that you want to do is call attention to your case by filng some action.

Even if the case was dismissed with prejudice, the same applies.  Time becomes your best friend as ka explains.  When a lender plaintiff brings an action, the lender has the burden of proof.  If the borrower brings some action, including any sort of quiet title, then the borrower has the burden of proof.  To obtain a discharge and release, you would probably have to prove that you paid the balance.

Just lay low, enjoy your low cost housing and put some time between you and the dismissal.  If you have a notice of acceleration, be sure to keep it, including the mailing envelope.  It can be extremely important evidence if you can get past limitations without the case being refiled.

It seems to me that ka and many others here at the Forum have become weary of the further victimization of borrowers and Forum vistors by a few criminals who lurk and post here, hoping to lure the foolish into giving them money.  (There was a crook named Christopher here earlier in the who was trying to rip people off.)

While ka's post may seem a bit harsh, it looks to be dead on as to the law.  Mr. Roper has posted about this before several times.  There are other posts by Mr. Roper similar to those linked by ka.  Search and read the older posts.  But resist the impulse to be proactive.

If you ever served in the military, perhaps you understand the concept of a "foxhole" or "fighting hole" (Marines).  To the extent you can, you want to well protected in a foxhole rather than wandering a dangerous battlefield looking to secure the victory against a better equipped and better armed opponent.  As long as you stay in your foxhole and remain alert and defensive, you are likely to survive.  If you stray from your foxhole and call attention to yourself, you will probably be attacked and mowed down.  Your adversaries have many other battles against numerous opponents.  The banks and servicers are undermanned, confused and even stunned in the wake of the robo-signing scandals.

You can go and kick them in the shins and pick a fight with them, getting their attention.  Or you can watch the ongoing war from a safe place.

I am aware of Forum participants passing their fifth and sixth year anniversaries of litigation while retaining their homes.  Those who are successful are those who have adopted effective defensive strategies.  Those who have initiated quiet title actions have mostly lost their homes some time ago.

Best of success and Merry Christmas!!
Quote 0 0

are you a real person, with a real case? In Pinellas need guidence ok? Don't BS us here in the forum, have some decency.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...