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
More on the non-negotiability of the mortgage note from the Florida Bar. It looks like this issue is not dead and will continue to be fought in court for the foreseeable future.  There should be no question about the non-negotiability of mortgage notes but the banks have a grip on our courts too.

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/JNJournal01.nsf/8c9f13012b96736985256aa900624829/ab90f3a395acd39f85257ac2006cab6a!OpenDocument
Quote 0 0
Cabinetmaniac
I love the Florida Bar Journal!

It is quite a wealth of information.
Quote 0 0
?
"More on the non-negotiability of the mortgage note", should not the interest to the question be, negotiable or negotiability? hint

Does the UCC Article 3 provide that a negotiable note cannot be negotiated for less than full value. So if an interest in the negotiable note is created then would the negotiable note be eligible for negotiation?

Would this explain why the notes are indorsed in blank and not further negotiated, would the now non-negotiable note be allowed to be conveyed to a subsequent owner of the interest in? Would this conveyance allow a subsequent owner of the interest in become a Holder in Due Course of the negotiated note?
Quote 0 0
Cabinetmaniac
? wrote:

Does the UCC Article 3 provide that a negotiable note cannot be negotiated for less than full value.


§ 3-302. HOLDER IN DUE COURSE.

(a) Subject to subsection (c) and Section 3-106(d), "holder in due course" means the holder of an instrumentif:
A negotiable note can certainly be negotiated for less than full value. The resulting note holder however is not a holder in due course.
Quote 0 0
Amazed
Once again, we have scam artist seeking to confuse and conflate definitions of "holder" and "holder in due course".  Mr. Roper repeatedly explained that a holder is a person with a right of enforcement of an instrument.  A holder in due course is a special subset of holders entited to a special immunity status.

There are numerous posts about this.  But the scam artists want to keep everyone confused, because this allows them to perpetrate their debt elimination scam myths.
Quote 0 0
Texas

§ 3-203. TRANSFER OF INSTRUMENT; RIGHTS ACQUIRED BY TRANSFER.

  • (a) An instrument is transferred when it is delivered by a person other than its issuer for the purpose of giving to the person receiving delivery the right to enforce the instrument.
  • (b) Transfer of an instrument, whether or not the transfer is a negotiation, vests in the transferee any right of the transferor to enforce the instrument, including any right as a holder in due course, but the transferee cannot acquire rights of a holder in due course by a transfer, directly or indirectly, from a holder in due course if the transferee engaged in fraud or illegality affecting the instrument.
  • (c) Unless otherwise agreed, if an instrument is transferred for value and the transferee does not become a holder because of lack of indorsement by the transferor, the transferee has a specifically enforceable right to the unqualified indorsement of the transferor, but negotiation of the instrument does not occur until the indorsement is made.
  • (d) If a transferor purports to transfer less than the entire instrument, negotiation of the instrument does not occur. The transferee obtains no rights under this Article and has only the rights of a partial assignee.
Quote 0 0
Cabinetmaniac
Amazed wrote:
Once again, we have scam artist seeking to confuse and conflate definitions of "holder" and "holder in due course". 


Once again we have an attack on a person who simply answered a question accurately with citation, while at the same time failing to provide any useful information or refutation.

If full value is given then the holder has a possibility of being a holder in due course. If less than full value is given then the holder cannot claim that right.



Transferring less than the entire instrument is a different issue than transferring the entire instrument for less than its full value.

Quote 0 0
? Are you saying that the florida bar site is a scam site? If not please explain.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...