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
As a newbie to the group, thought I would give insight to my 13-year hobby...also known as "groundhog day" with an amazing cast of characters... Investaid, Popular Mortgage ABS, Equity One, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of New York/Mellon, Litton and Ocwen.  (Was there any skankster I missed?)  Currently in round 3 of foreclosure fraud, and round 2 of litigation, it is amazing what I have discovered since taking control of my destiny out of the "complete control" of legal counsel, and doing my own in-depth research.  Forgery and fraud are only the tips of the icebergs.  Don't get me wrong... legal counsel is an ABSOLUTE MUST!  

I could also use some assistance if anyone can offer... I have already gone as far as possible with the SEC Edgar DB.  Also found some additional "swaps" between JPMCB and BONYM, but still trying to tie everything together, in that:  Yes, my mortgage was supposed to be in the trust, but is there a way to verify it made the trust?  Also, as a 15d was filed one year after closing date of trust, no additional info available except that trust was down to 52, so not sure if they stopped reporting due to the fact they were below minimum or because of other reasons.  Original Lender closed up shop one year later in 2006.  JPMorgan Chase and Bank of New York did their asset "swap", which lists the trust a few years later, but that's it.  Assignments are all robo-signed and fraudsters, but I need the glue that ties the SEC info to the assignment mess, as the dates resonate "coverup".  Any advice, or service you know of, that does this would be appreciated.  Opposing parties have stalled providing evidence and original docs... no surprise here, but also no help.  

Knowledge I will pass along:  Read EVERY document you have word by word and compare it to their RECORDED copy.  By doing this, I discovered the following critical evidence:

1.  Forged my signature and initials on original loan document in 2005.  
2.  Recorded a completely different loan document (wrong State form, different witness) in 2005 than the one I signed and still have copy of.
3.  Changed the MERS language, Force Placed Hazard Insurance language and assorted other paragraphs in original loan document 2005

This is just one document...  

Sue Yopek
Quote 0 0
Hi, Wicked1. You are ABSOLUTELY correct, READ EVERYTHING on their paperwork! The places that produce the documents almost always produce them much 'after-the-fact'.
Many of the document producers have been found guilty of fraud. "Pillar Processing" was a 'back-room assembly line' extension of Stephen Baum's law firm. Both were put out of business by AG of NY, Schneiderman.
"Nationwide Title Clearing" was sued by Illinois AG Madigan.
Can't even think now of all the others I have encountered, but you MUST read and check every entity that appears on your documents.
We now know that some of the banks are using 'pre-notarized' assignments, and forgetting to put who they assigned to in the blank. Turns out the notary is an actual notary, her registration is on the records in Illinois. Her name is Brenda Marie Copeland, and her 'erstwhile' "appeared before me" is "Shandrika Anderson". Shandrika signs for different companies, but the blank assignment with these womens' names are the's a "one-size-fits-all" just fill in your blanks, document.
Important parts of all PSAs to look for are: "Closing Date" (most always assigned after that date, in violation of the trust), if it is a REMIC. IRC section 860 does NOT allow inclusion after the "Closing Date", and never allows an already in default loan to be assigned, and look for the 'repurchase' language. That is most often the "sole remedy" available if 'conveyance' by the "Closing Date" fails.
If New York law is chosen as the "Choice of Law Provision" (CLP), there is a six year statute of limitations to 'repurchase'. If conveyance failed, and no repurchase was made by six years after the "Closing Date" in States like New York and Nevada, the Note is now unenforceable. PERIOD! Each State listed as the CLP has different statutes of limitations, CHECK THEM, based on the CLP, NOT where you live! The CLP State limits will ALWAYS apply!
ALWAYS follow the chain of ownership if any of the 'assigned to' entities no longer exist. Often, the document producers just 'assign' to whoever the bank needs the assignment to, without checking to see who 'bought' the failed bank. For instance, Fremont Investment and Loan was purchased by "CapitalSource" in 2008, and that meant MERS could NO LONGER assign for Fremont. MERS, by their own mandates, then HAD to record the assignment in the local land records for the property, if the new 'owner' was even assigned the loan....(which it usually was NOT).
I am available to 'try' to answer questions. Feel free to contact me: "ContrairiMairi at aol dot com", and use "MS Fraud, Need Help" in the subject line.
Quote 0 0

I fully agree with reading the documents. But for us it boiled down to the fact that our mortgage/property was converted into a mortgage backed security. It is true that there is a Prospectus. And each Prospectus has a section referred to as a Pooling Servicing Agreement (PSA) which outlined the rules/regulations of the securities. Here where it gets interesting for the homeowner of the property turned into the MBS. According to the PSA a mortgage must have certain issues in place to be entered in a pool:

a)      the seller must transfer or assign all its rights, title and interest in the mortgage loan and related documents, this must be completed within the timeline provided by the PSA, usually within 90 days of your closing date

b)      the mortgage must be free of any liens

c)      the mortgage must comply with the state and federal predatory lending laws

d)      the trustee must have the original loan documents in their possession

e)      and the trustee must have evidence of endorsements as proof of funds provided by the financial institution

Unfortunately, all these rules/regulations only protect the shareholders of those securities. So far from what we have seen the property owners of those converted MBA’s do not seem to be covered by the PSA. If someone can show us how the homeowner can benefit, then please do so. Because each one of the issues I mentioned occurred on our loan. We have reported this to numerous government departments. We have even been told fraud was committed against us and no one has lifted a hand to help us.

a)      Our closing date on our property was June 15, 2005 and the transfer of the title and all rights occurred on November 8, 2013.

b)      Countrywide or the underwriter, the Royal Bank of Scotland had 90 days to ensure there were no liens on the property. Yet at closing there existed three liens on the property and the final lien was released in May of 2006.

c)      We were informed two weeks before our closing date that we needed more money at closing than originally told. The agent we were working with informed us he knew someone at Washington Mutual (WAMU) who could help. At closing, after hours of reviewing all the documents for main loan on the property, we were quickly rushed through the WAMU loan. We only recently discovered the loan was dated two days prior to closing and the property listed on the equity line of credit was the property we were trying to purchase. So obviously we had no equity in this property and had no rights or authority on the property. Because we didn’t own it yet. There is no way the underwriter was not aware of this considering these were the remaining funds that secured our 20% down payment for the property. Without these funds the larger loan could not take place.

d)      The trustee does not have our original note/loan. We have a letter from the current financial institution managing the account, that they cannot locate the original documents.

e)      And finally, the last and most insulting. We sent numerous complaints to Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) and Bank of America’s response was to send, again and again and again etc. copies of the note from the title company which had a certified stamp on the first page of the note stating, “The undersigned certifies this to be a true and correct copy of the original”. And yet, not even one of the copies had any endorsements whatsoever. It was only in May of 2016 when Bank of America mailed us a response letter which included copies once again from the title company which also had the same certified stamp on top of the first page of the note. Only this time a blank endorsement had been inserted and two robo-stamped signatures had been added to the signature page. We hired a certified forensic loan auditor who discovered evidence that, the employee who signed the blank endorsement they inserted, was not even an employee for the lender supplying the loan, at the time of closing. Also, we had a certified handwriting expert review the two signatures and he stated they were definitely added, after the fact.

What’s even more interesting is the information we came across recently. We discovered that the courts are fully aware of the deception of these financial institutions. For example, the Royal Bank of Scotland or better known as RBS, trained employees on how to forge signatures. Please read this article titled; Royal Bank of Scotland Trained Employees on How to Forge Signatures:

Posted by Neil Garfield | February 19, 2018

Located at: Also, there is additional information at

We have some additional court documents which are quite large, which addresses the individuals involved in the forgery and additional deceptive acts. For those who are interested just email mail and I will send them to your drop box. The issues I mentioned above we have been fighting for years. It seems the courts do not recognize the homeowners who work hard to pay for their homes, thinking it to be their property. Yet, the homeowners who have invested just as much money as the shareholders, if not more, are not protected. Only the shareholders rights seem to be protected.
Lyn W
Quote 0 0
Hi, Lynn! The PSA, Prospectus, and Supplemental Prospectus are each separate documents, but are usually "lumped" together.
There are parts of the PSA that mandate how to handle most of the issues you raise.

The "Closing Date" is always the starting point. Any 'asset' that was not assigned on or before the "Closing Date" is NOT an 'asset' of the trust!

First, it is a HUGE asset if the trust you are working with is governed by New York law.
NY EPTL 7 - 2.1 The trust must be named (no blank assignments!)
NY EPTL 7 - 2.4  The trust mandates CANNOT be contravened (even if the certificate holders would agree, which is PREPOSTEROUS if it's a REMIC. What certificate holders are going to vote to impose 100% tax on their earnings?????)

NY CPLR 213.2  Six year statute of limitations to force 'repurchase' when the assignment failed (and IT DID! I PROMISE!)

NY CPLR 212  Statute of limitations to foreclose is six years after acceleration of the debt...When did you default, and when did they bring the case...?

You have to find the PSA registered at the SEC. Usually, section 11.04 (or somewhere thereabouts) has the "Governing Law". That CLP is extremely important, because more and more courts are recognizing things like this:

"If the note and deed of trust have been transferred to a trust as part of securitization, the trustee must comply with Pooling and Servicing Agreement (“PSA”) which gives the Trustee power over all the notes and deed of trust in that particular security.”  (See - Asset Securitization: Comptroller's Handbook, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, November 1997,"

Also, "In Re: Kemp, from NJ Bankruptcy court: “upon the sale of the note and mortgage, the fact that the note was not properly endorsed to the new owner also defeated enforceability.”

Deutsche Bank Nat’l Trust Co. v. Jacobs, 2017 IL App (2d) 151288-U:  “The Bank attached a copy of the mortgage, note, and assignment to the amended complaint, thereby raising a presumption that it had standing to enforce the note. Defendant cannot overcome the fact that he presented no evidence to rebut this presumption.

If you are having trouble finding your particular PSA, I can try to help....I'm getting good at it, even if the attys 'name' it incorrectly (they often do to throw you off the track!)

I know you are familiar with Neil Garfield, and he talks about 'presumptions' ALL the time! If the REMIC mandates of IRC 860 (if your trust is a REMIC) were violated, if NY law governs and it was violated, and if you have the PSA with it's mandates, and those are violated, you MUST keep fighting! You HAVE won, you just have to convince the Court!

One PSA I have found actually has a mandate that says: 

Section 10.10


(a) Except for transactions and activities entered into in connection with the securitization that is the subject of this agreement, the trust created by this agreement is not authorized and has no power to:

(ii)merge with another entity, reorganize, liquidate or sell assets;

 In other words, (and this is true of all trusts, but they rarely admit it like this one does) once a loan is securitized, it may never be made a 'mortgage/note' again. It is like putting fruit in a can NEVER take 'just' the banana out again. THAT is what happened to the loans that got 'pooled'. They became a HUGE 'smoothie'.

In most trusts, the "Depositor" must assign to the trust, with ALL 'intervening assignments/endorsements' evidenced. This is a MUST verify, because most foreclosure complaints have assignments from the 'lender' to the 'trust'. CAN'T HAPPEN!

If you are in State court, you should be able to hit them with:  UCC 1-302: “by agreement of the parties”, the chosen terms govern, and trust entities are bound, by the oath they swore when they filed the trust with the SEC, that they did/will obey the terms set forth in the trust governing documents and mandates.

Many Federal courts will not accept UCC codes. Some will, most won't. It's always worth a try.

I have collected a LOT of case law for various arguments, but it would be easier to know which would benefit you....

If there's anything I can help you with, just ask....I'll do my best....I just want to see EVERYONE possible defeat the crooks that are after them! They broke the law, NOT the borrowers.

For the record, I am NOT an attorney. PTL! I can help find useful information, but I offer NO LEGAL ADVICE!

Quote 0 0

How do you find out if the trust is governed by New York Law? We defaulted I believe they filed for foreclosure in June of 2016. But we were in a chapter 13 bankruptcy which was recently dismissed. Now they have set up a sale date in July. What angers me so is the only physical money trail, is the money we paid in. During that time period individuals were signing things without checking things out for verification, including funds. How else would it have slipped through the cracks that a bank creates a loan for a customer and lists a property they don't own or have any equity in?

I have additional questions but it is quite late here. I'm in the east coast time zone. Maybe I can send you some additional questions tomorrow.

Lyn W
Quote 0 0
In 2005 Countrywide was a New York corporation. Does that help?
Lyn W
Quote 0 0
Lyn, Do you have a copy of your "Pooling and Servicing Agreement"? If not, your case should have a "name" like JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as trustee for the certificate holders of Deutsche Bank, certificate series XYZ "2005". Do you have the 'caption' from the top of the complaint that was filed? Does it claim to be representing a trust?

You said you took the loan out in 2005. By then, they were loaning money (NOT theirs, Investor money!) willy-nilly. They would give a loan to anything that breathed. Immediately after you signed your papers, before the ink was even dry, they were passing ALL liabilities for what they had just "Investors".

Your loan most likely went into a trust that closed in 2005. They just didn't hang on to the loans. If your loan was 'allegedly' assigned in 2005, but the actual assignment papers were not made till 2013, you CAN win your WON'T be easy! If you are ready for the fight of your life, I'll help you all I can!

Courts still believe borrowers are 'getting free houses' if they rule for the borrowers. It's the banks that are stealing our money while we are paying, and stealing our homes when we don't. The banks are getting free money and free houses. They BROKE the LAW! Borrowers only fell on hard times because of the banks' greed. They over-inflated appraisals, then, when their ponzi scheme collapsed, they decided to continue to steal. You HAVE to remember that going into this fight, and be prepared. The courts will say HORRIBLE things about you, and usually always side with the banks. It's an ugly fight, but you CAN win!

PLEASE do not post your personal info here. My e-mail is up above. Keep your privacy! Personal things do NOT belong posted on a public blog....

Here's how I feel about this, and then, it's up to you how you want to work on this. I am helping others, but I have never been in foreclosure. I have seen how others lives are being destroyed by these vermin, and I am VERY GOOD at finding information....that is what I offer....
GOD Bless you, whatever you decide.
Quote 0 0
Just as an FYI,

I and a few others brought suits because even though we have not defaulted, and are not in foreclosure, the same is true for us....they DON'T own our loans. The courts will NOT let us through. Everyone I know 'recently' who has tried has been stopped dead in their tracks. I am DETERMINED to change that!
Quote 0 0
What methods have you tried so far, so I won't waste my time? 
Lyn W
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...