This is no longer the case, and almost daily, borrowers are winning their homes and the banks are continually exposed for comitting fraud upon the courts as a result.
You can find no support for the assertion that that homeowners are "winning their homes" on a daily basis. Nothing could be further from the truth.
This is the sort of nonsense being perpetrated by debt elimination scam swindlers.
In the post-robosigning era since Autumn 2010, there are two dramatic developments, particularly in judicial foreclosure states. First, revelations about widespread robo-signing of affidavits has resulted in extensive delays in moving foreclosures forward, particularly when a borrower is represented and presents any valid and robust defense. This has resulted in many delays. It has only resulted in a handful of borrower victories.
These victories are measured by voluntary dismissals and extended delays. Some dismissed cases have not yet been the subject of a re-filing. But this does not mean that the borrower has won. It simply means that the foreclosure is delayed and on hold.
Related to and separate from the chaos associated with robo-signed affidavits, courts are also congested as the result of collapse of foreclosure mill law firms in Florida and New York, the new attorney affirmation requirement in New York and other similar developments which have resulted in both confusion and court congestion.
In some instances, borrowers who have employed legally vacuous methods suggested by the swindlers have found their cases delayed by some of the other factors discussed above and confuse this delay for success in a totally ineffective defensive approach. The borrower may falsely perceive that the use of the strategies suggested by swindlers has won a delay or has intimidated the plaintiff, when it is merely the post meltdown chaos which has caused the delay.
The second major development, also related to the robo-signing scandal, but also already underway and separate from the robo-signing, is an increasing string of appellate court decisions nationally on evidentiary issues, standing, and conditions precedent. These decisions have resulted in reversals and some (standing) dismissals without prejudice. Most of the evidentiary decisions have resulted in the reversal and remand of summary judgments.
While these certainly should be counted as borrower victories, they hardly reflect a borrower actually ultimately prevailing and preventing a foreclosure. The remanded case is sent back in the trial court. The borrower might win and might lose, depending upon how the matter is resolved at trial.
floridapathy, there is much reason for encouragement and with a robust and viable defense, a foreclosure might be averted for some time, ONLY the swindlers are holding out the false hope that the borrower is LIKELY to ultimately prevail. Only by falsely holding out these myths that the borrow is likely to prevail can the swindlers persuade distressed borrowers to pay for a variety of totally useless documents, training aids, purported evidentiary material and even fees from crooked lawyers or scam artists engaged in the unauthorized practice of law.
As Bill, ka, George, Mr. Lewis and others have been explaining, following the extensive published posts of Mr. Roper, there are a variety of viable defenses that a borrower can use to delay and possibly to even win. But these are NOT based upon some inherent defect in the securitization or other real impairment in the plaintiff's right to enforce the promissory note and mortgage.
Rather, they reflect a wide variety of errors in the process of of bringing foreclosure, which errors usually CAN and WILL be corrected.
When you see a post where the mortgage investor and/or servicer is described as a "pretender lender", this is usually part of the vocabulary of the scam artists and swindlers. You need to disabuse yourself of the idea that there was any securitization failure or that there is any real impairment in the servicer's right to enforce the instrument.
This is NOT to say that you should admit to such a right or NOT RESIST the foreclosure. To the contrary, the foreclosure can often be successfully forestalled and sometimes even beaten. But this will ALWAYS be due to mistakes made by the plaintiff in litigation and evidentiary deficiencies rather than something that could be proven by reference to discovery of some additional documents within the control of the plaintiff.
There is no magic bullet which will result in a borrower winning! There are only a variety of robust defensive strategies that are effective at delay and which may result in a win through forced evidentiary errors.