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
Major Buck Snort
 

I WENT TO TRIAL, AND WON "sorta" AND I AM MAD AS HELL!

 

After being in foreclosure since Oct 2008 on July 31st I got my day in court. Being without enough money to hire a lawyer, I have had to go pro se. Much thanks to so many people that have kept me in my home.

I made it through Summary Judgment because although they originally filed a lost note count, they dropped it and declared it found, but it took almost a year for them to produce it. When we had a hearing about it, the judge noted that there was no affidavit saying when they aquired it, and said that they would have to have someone with direct knowledge testify. They then moved for trial.

I had always maintained that the party suing me did not have standing. They filed a assignment of mortgage from Quick Loan Funding to City Global Markets Realty Corp on 11/09/2008 and the suit was filed Oct 29 2008 with Liquidation Properties Inc,as the plaintiff. At our first hearing I was asked what I intended to do about this?,"meaning the lawsuit" and I responded " I intend to fight" He then asked "Why did you stop paying your mortgage?" and I replied " I wanted to make sure the payments are going to the proper parties" He was not impressed. I asked him to show me the connection between Quick Loan Funding and Liquidation Properties Inc. He hurries into the paperwork, and asks the plaintiffs attorney " wheres the assignment, and she speaks for the first time "Aren't they with the papers?" he continued looking for the assignment, and I then brought up the matter of the Note, and he almost yelled " We have a copy of the Note!" I held out my hand took the document, and made him wait until I looked it over, and I said to him " Your honor, I would be happy to give the plaintiffs a copy of some money" He said " Hearing is postponed, you will have to file your assigns" he said it so fast, that the attorney asked what he had said, and he repeated it.

As me and my wife were hurrying to get out of the courtroom, happy to have survived the first hearing, he asked me " So, you feel that you don't owe anything? and I responded " I owe your honor, I just don't owe these people" That concluded the first hearing, and set the tone of the case.

I will cut to the chase and say that the day of the trial they produced a witness without notice, and unfiled documents. I was a little shocked, but still confident in my position.

Before I could present my evidence, but after they presented the 6 assignments the Judge started shooting them down on standing. The plaintiffs attorney argued that all the names were sister Delaware corporations, and he told her that she could not sell her sisters dress.

He looked over the assignments and told her that everything else looked fine, that he would rule in my favor without prejudice and that she could refile and was sure to get a Summary Judgment. And advised me to negotiate with them, and that I had lived in my house for 5 years without making payments, taxes or insurance. I said I would be happy to and the witness came over and saked
This blows my mind, that they could file a assignment, then file the suit in the wrong name, then file another from DOCX 11 months later in the name of Liquidation Properties, a clear case of Bifurcation. Then transfer assignments from both entity's to City Group Global Markets Realty Markets, then transfer interest to AS Lily LLC, henceforth known as the suckers. These folks are outside of MERs.
I don't know if they will refile now under the new law, and since it been over 5 years since I made a payment if the statute of limitations of five years will apply?

Quote 0 0
I would search diligently for the Letter of Default if you do not have it readily available.  BTW, did they present one at Summary Judgement Trial and is it available in the case file for you to make a "certified" copy?  Which entity sent the Letter of Default?  Is this entity the Plaintiff in the case and do you know if it will be the same entity that will be pursuing the Foreclosure Case in the future (if it is not time bar).  My guess is if the case was filed in October, your last payment was about 4-months (or more) before October, 2008.

Hopefully you did get copies of all those assignments.  Keep a low profile for now and see what their next step will be.  All the best!
Quote 0 0
Major Buck Snort
Thanks.
Quote 0 0
Orville
Prepare a very detailed bar disciplinary complaint against the attorneys who filed the suit, but don't file it until the suit is re-filed.  Have the bar disciplinary complaint filed by some shill other than yourself so that you are not locked into any sworn positions in respect of the validity of the notice of acceleration.

The pendency of a bar disciplinary complaint may give the plaintiff some pause in further pursuing the matter, particularly in attacking the original notice of acceleration.  However, realize that it is almost certain that the plaintiff will engage a new law firm when they re-file the suit.  This enables the new attorneys to plausibly claim ignorance about the past mischief:  "The other suit Your Honor?  Our client was represented by another different firm at that time and we cannot speak to the pleadings and evidence submitted to the court by that firm.  But we are here to seek judgment for our client in this new suit which is all new and improved!"
Quote 0 0
Major Buck Snort
A new suit, with the new and improved law, provided by the best legislature that money can buy.
Quote 0 0
Bill,
It appears that you just got lucky with a friendly judge the first time around.

Standing is usually just a road bump, the UCC allows the holder to enforce the note.

There are many other more robust defenses that can really give the Plaintiff headaches. I would suggest you begin to read older threads on evidence, personal knowledge, hearsay, ect.. which would give you some defenses and evidence problems to point out or you will quickly lose at SJ.

Quote 0 0
Major Buck Snort
Bill,
Thanks for your input.
After the hearing was postponed, it was reset for 30 days later. The day of this hearing we arrived and was told that the plaintiff had canceled the hearing.
This was done because they were waiting for the ordered up second assignment from DOCX in the name of the suing party, Liquidation Properties. They never presented the first assignment that was in the name of City Global Markets Realty Corp until trial.
As to the "note" the suit was filed with a lost note count. After a exchange of motions, they declared that they had found the original, "upon my examination I concluded it was a photocopy based on the fact that we remembered that we were made to sign in blue ink only, and these signatures are in black" it took them almost a year to produce the note to the court. And the judge noted that there was not a affidavit with the note stating as to when the note came into their possession. Citing the recent problems with affidavits " The law firm was Ben Ezra & Katz" that he would require them to have a person with direct knowledge testify before summary judgment. And if it was after the date of the lawsuit, they might have problems. They then moved for trial.
I had earl er brought up the fact to the judge that the mortgage that I had took out in 2003 from Ameriquest was still on the books, and that it had kept me from getting refinanced. I told him that when I had contacted on line "Lending Tree" about refinancing they looked into it and informed me that I had two mortgages on my home already. I told them that the 2006 loan paid that mortgage off. But they said it was still on the record. When I showed the Judge a copy the mortgage, that I had got on line, he replied " There is a piece of paper somewhere that cancels this." And I said " Well I had a mortgage that I paid off in 1993, And one I took out in 1999, and they are not still on the record, the point is that it kept me from refinancing" He replied "Well you would have just screwed them to".
I kid you not. I did not say it because I was so startled at his response, that the point is I had not received full consideration from the loan I am being sued over.
Thanks for everyone's thoughts.
Quote 0 0
TNL
Don't go back in there without a Court Reporter. If the Judge wants to make remarks like the ones mentioned, you should have it on record. With a Court Reporter present and knowing that he is being recorded the Judge may be more cautious in ruling with the law and not his perceived bias of the matters that are in front of him.
Quote 0 0
Major Buck Snort
A copy of the post

Foreclosure in Florida…There is No “Winning a Foreclosure” For Consumer (The Bank Can Just Refile Over and Over)


John Andersaon
  August 6, 2013 at 11:10 am
http://www.repost.us/article-preview/hash/73409891a003363d1550a9e2e123a83e/

Matt,
Thank you for your work. Your reporting of the truth, is unique in your profession.
And with all this in mind, the only conclusion I can come up with is if one wants justice, in Florida, they will have to obtain it in Federal Court.
After defeating Summary Judgment, and having the matter set for trial, I thought I had a chance to win. And I did “sorta”. And I thought that Foreclosure Court was a court of equity, not a court of law. That the baby could not be split in half. That I would win the house, or lose it, but the matter would be settled. That once the foreclosure suit was past Summary Judgment and set for trial, that there would be no second bite of the apple allowed.The matter was decided in my favor, on standing, but with out prejudice.
Now I am learning that it don’t make that much difference.
The suit damages sought $179,000.00 and the new plaintiffs had offered a selttlement offer of $72,000.00 back in 2011, but the fact that the mortgage taken out in 2003 had not been removed by the mortgage taken out in 2006. So it appears to lenders that I have two mortgages.
So the fight goes on.
I am hopeful that lawyers like you will get these new rules overturned. Again Thanks

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...