I have read for many hours the posts on this site and around the Internet. I think I can now do the commercial where the guy is sitting in front of the computer when a voice says, "You have reached the end of the Internet!"
I have much good information spinning around in my head and in my computer's brain, yet I have nothing but loose ends! I am very limited in what I can piece together myself. But I found this statement somewhere in my online research and it seems to be the place to start (Sorry, I failed to make a note of which case it came from):
A whisper of fraud can topple the pillars of even the most impregnable contract, for to base a contract upon fraud is to build it upon sand. This court has repeatedly stated that:
The purpose and effect of the evidence introduced in the case at bar is not to contradict or vary the terms of the written contract, but to show that the plaintiff was imposed upon, and the fraud was practiced in obtaining his signature thereto. Fraud vitiates everything it touches, and a contract obtained thereby is voidable. And evidence is always admissible to show that contracts have been fraudulently obtained.
We honor this rule because "the public policy fostering the certainty and stability of contracts gives way to the public policy against fraud."
This quote reminds me of when my son played college football. He was 5' 8", 185 pounds, but fast and fearless. As a mom, I worried when I saw 275-350 lbs. opponents crowd the field (I know, I know!). I asked him if he was afraid when he saw his huge opponents. He replied, "Naw, Mom, I just hit 'em low and watch 'em fall!"
I am facing a 99.9% chance of losing my home very soon. So with that reality, I'm thinking it unwise to keep supporting a lawyer monthly to essentially throw sand in the gears. (God bless Mark Stopa, who reportedly charges $1500 a YEAR to represent Florida homeowners.)
Since fraud vitiates everything it touches and makes a contract voidable, where should one start and finish in defending against the fundamental fraud? Or is defending against fraud in the inducement an impossible challenge because of the complexity and secret dealing?
I realize every case is unique, but in a way, they are similar: Most mortgages are permeated with fraud. Is it possible for the great minds on this site to come up with a concise plan or outline for defending against fraud in the inducement, especially with MERS mortgages?
I'm wanting us to topple a pillar or two!