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
John W
I would appreciate any help to determine if I have an unperfected lien.

Here's what I got in discovery that makes me think the lien might not have been perfected with the originating lender as the mortgagee (and MERS, of course).

This page of info seems to prove that the real lender was not disclosed in the transaction, and the straw-man lender was not the lender:



Additional Conditions
(Attachment to Lender's Instructions)

Loan number: xxxxxx (my loan number)

If the title company fails to collect fees as requested in our closing instructions, or if the title company sends our funds to the incorrect party, we must be reimbursed immediately. We will not wait for the title company to recover funds. 

All Loans must be closed on the same day as indicated on the loan documents, signatures must match typed name. 

You are responsible for obtaining all outstanding conditions and returning them with your closing package.

Failure to return closed packages with in 24 hours after closing, the title company will be assessed $100.00 a day till the package is received. 

If for any reason the file does not close on the closing date and the wires have been sent, the title company is responsible on wiring the money back to the following:

Bank of New York
101 Barclay Street
New York, NY 10019

ABA#xxxxx BONY ID #

Credit: Countrywide Warehouse Lending/Pay Off Account

Account #xxxxxxxxxxxxx  Countrywide Account #

Please reference borrower's name and loan number!!!!!

We cannot give any funding numbers.

Must collect and pay taxes at closing. 



On other pages of the closing instructions, I found a sheet that is an agreement
between the original lender and Countrywide Correspondent Lending to sell/purchase my loan. This page lists loan amount and maximum delivery amount, which is $50,000 higher than the loan amount. Then it gives info on the loan and at the bottom of the page, it shows my loan number. This was not my loan number with the originating lender, but was the number Countrywide sent to me a couple of months later when it sent notice of the transfer. Obviously it knew my "new" loan number on the day of closing. This page also shows the "Target Funding date" as 12 days after closing. 

The original lender adds a page that describes the package type as "Funding."

The mortgage was recorded with the originating lender and MERS as mortgagees.


Can anyone tell if this was handled in a way that perfected the lien? 







Quote 0 0
Texas
John W

If I was you, I would check the laws of the state for filing for Perfection, somewhat similar to filing a Material Mans Lien. Under most states equivalence of the UCC filing for "Priority of Perfection" (MERS took place of Priority Filing) and filing for "Perfection" (Public Record) may not be the same. Herein you need to look at the state Lien Laws/Recording Laws on Perfection of a Real Estate Lien as UCC Article 9 (Payment Intangible Liens) excludes Liens on Real Estate. The short in many states, filing of record perfects the lien securing a note and as such assigning a lien would then need to be recorded to show the subsequent purchaser of the note has a secured/perfected lien in a timely fashion.

How you apply the information is left up to you for I am not an attorney nor do I care to be. Good Luck and God Bless

Quote 0 0
Floridapathy
I'm new to MSFraud, so please don't take my comment as any type of advice because you seem to be much more educated than I am.

I think I am not fully understanding the whole "pooling and servicing agreement" point of attack used to prove or disprove standing, but I know it goes to the root of proper chain of title and custody especially come to find out that the majority of loans never made into the trusts and, or many trusts have even claimed to have never held custody.

That said, what I believe I'm not understanding is the matter of "who owns the loan?" So all of these mortgage servicers claim to foreclose on behalf of the owner, and they come to court with their allones? assignments x? etc, but when has anyone come to court with a real receipt?

What I am asking is, surely if the foreclosing party is claiming to be the true purchaser of the debt, or foreclosing on behalf of the true purchaser of that debt, why aren't they required to produce a receipt of the wire transfers?

If the mortgage is the "real" receipt, than I must object because even the titles of my vehicles show the transfers, and yet anyone can apply for a new title wether they actually purchased the vehicle or not right? So how is the mortgage the proper document?




Quote 0 0
John W
@Texas,

So maybe basic title and recording law might make the judge's day. I'll check out the suggestions you gave. Thanks.

@ Floridapathy, 

The one thing I learned by browsing the old posts on this site is to stay focused on why it's important that the borrower is paying the person entitled to enforce. The judge is not going to buy into a borrower trying to invalidate the obligation to pay as agreed, so I figure if my research takes me in that direction, I'm wasting time.

From start until now, I have 11 lenders or servicers involved in my loan. Some have similar names, but they are not the same company. I have no idea if I have paid the person entitled to enforce. I'm trying to find out, but that's not easy. I have two servicers right now telling me to make my payments to them. One just started pre-foreclosure. 

I am not a lawyer and I'm not saying this is what anyone else should do, but I hope the judge who hears my case will consider this from the Veal decision and maybe decide the one suing me has lack of standing. I'm hoping that the letter I received telling me to pay a new servicer, while the old servicer is telling me to pay too, might show the risk of duplicative claims:

A thorough understanding of the concept of a “person entitled to enforce” is key to sorting out the relative rights and obligations of the various parties to a mortgage transaction. In particular, the person obligated on the note – a “maker” in the argot of Article 3 – must pay the obligation represented by the note to the “person entitled to enforce” it.

UCC § 3-412.

Further, if a maker pays a “person entitled to enforce” the note, the maker’s obligations are discharged to the extent of the amount paid. UCC § 3-602(a).

Put another way, if a maker makes a payment to a “person entitled to enforce,” the obligation is satisfied on a dollar for dollar basis, and the maker never has to pay that amount again. Id. See also UCC § 3-602(c).

If, however, the maker pays someone other than a “person entitled to enforce” – even if that person physically possesses the note the maker signed – the payment generally has no effect on the obligations under the note. The maker still owes the money to the “person entitled to enforce,” (Miller & Harrell, supra, ¶ 6.03[6] [b] [ii]), and, at best, has only an action in restitution to recover the mistaken payment. See UCC § 3-418(b) (emphasis added).

A borrower has a right to know if the right party is demanding payment and that each payments is applied to discharge the debt appropriately. 

What gets to me is how I blindly followed instructions in a letter telling me to send my payments somewhere else. For less than 50 cents for a postage stamp, I started sending someone else a $1000 payment and didn't ask a question. I could kick myself. I'm usually smarter than that, but, I'm ashamed to say, somehow I just didn't question whether the change was even FROM the lender. 

Never again.  




 
Quote 0 0
Floridapathy
John W wrote:
I would appreciate any help to determine if I have an unperfected lien.

Here's what I got in discovery that makes me think the lien might not have been perfected with the originating lender as the mortgagee (and MERS, of course).

This page of info seems to prove that the real lender was not disclosed in the transaction, and the straw-man lender was not the lender:



Additional Conditions
(Attachment to Lender's Instructions)

Loan number: xxxxxx (my loan number)

If the title company fails to collect fees as requested in our closing instructions, or if the title company sends our funds to the incorrect party, we must be reimbursed immediately. We will not wait for the title company to recover funds. 

All Loans must be closed on the same day as indicated on the loan documents, signatures must match typed name. 

You are responsible for obtaining all outstanding conditions and returning them with your closing package.

Failure to return closed packages with in 24 hours after closing, the title company will be assessed $100.00 a day till the package is received. 

If for any reason the file does not close on the closing date and the wires have been sent, the title company is responsible on wiring the money back to the following:

Bank of New York
101 Barclay Street
New York, NY 10019

ABA#xxxxx BONY ID #

Credit: Countrywide Warehouse Lending/Pay Off Account

Account #xxxxxxxxxxxxx  Countrywide Account #

Please reference borrower's name and loan number!!!!!

We cannot give any funding numbers.

Must collect and pay taxes at closing. 



On other pages of the closing instructions, I found a sheet that is an agreement
between the original lender and Countrywide Correspondent Lending to sell/purchase my loan. This page lists loan amount and maximum delivery amount, which is $50,000 higher than the loan amount. Then it gives info on the loan and at the bottom of the page, it shows my loan number. This was not my loan number with the originating lender, but was the number Countrywide sent to me a couple of months later when it sent notice of the transfer. Obviously it knew my "new" loan number on the day of closing. This page also shows the "Target Funding date" as 12 days after closing. 

The original lender adds a page that describes the package type as "Funding."

The mortgage was recorded with the originating lender and MERS as mortgagees.


Can anyone tell if this was handled in a way that perfected the lien? 


 
John thanks for taking the time to explain that a little indepth. And not to convolute your original question, I've replied with it above this time in hope it will get more attention from forum members.
 
You bring up an interesting issue regarding lien perfection, and I too wonder about mine also. From all I've read, it is plausible that in my (originating) lender's haste they also may not have secured a perfected lien.
 
Refinanced -- Previous lender sends satisfaction of lien.  But that satisfaction is robo-signed DocX (Linda Green), so how does it evince legal proof that the former debt was "actually" satisfied, or that the new lender legally acquired the loan by actually paying for it?
 
At closing, the note went to the Lender, and MERS shows Deutsche as "Investor". The mortgage was signed over to MERS "as mortgagee, and nominee", and had a return address to the Title Agency (who is also the Lender).
 
The county records have not changed from closing in 2007, no transfers endorsements etc. Duetsche was not listed on MERS prior to 2010, and the loan is now being sent to the third servicer (Avelo, Litton, Ocwen).
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...