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
I have posted before and plaintiff filed motion for SJ last week, hearing is set for next month.

My attorney thinks I have a descent chance.

In Summary:

WF filed in its own name without evening mentioning that they sold the loan 1 month after I closed to the FHLB-MPF program, they admitted it was sold in discovery and in the SJ motion but claim they can foreclose as the servicer even though they say they sold the "beneficial interest" of the loan.  They may be allowed to but for some reason they didnt say that they are only the servicer in the orginal foreclosure complaint and they are foreclosing on behalf of the FHLB-MPF or whomever they sold it to.

They do have the orginal note becuase as per the FHLB-MPF guidlines which they sent as part of discovery they are allowed to act as their own custodian, hence, they have the oririginal note, the guidlines also state that there has to be an assignment executed to the FHLB-MPF but not recorded as part of the custodian file, however, they admit there are no assignments. The guidlines also say the note has to be endored in blank, which it is not, the only endorsment is to WF bank.

They also admit that they lost the mortgage which was never recorded and have no idea if it still even exists, although they did file an affadavit from the closing attorney who said he intended to record but his files have been destroyed and it is his fault or the title companies fault but nobody has any idea what happened to the  mortgage. My attorney thinks that it is very possible that the Mtg and the note were split since they sold the loan/note without the mortgage, which had to be the case beucase they admit they dont have the mortgage and never did. 

They also lied in the BK court to get stay relief that they did have a recorded mortgage, even providing false book and page numbers, I am using unclean hands as an affirmative defense and also a maxim that Mr. Roper suggested. 

We are also using Judicial Etoppel becuase they argued 1 way in the BK court and now are claiming something else in the state court. 

Any thoughts???  Thanks

My attorney, is starting his SJ repsonse this week.
Quote 0 0
The Equitable One
Yes, I have thoughts.

In spite of this likely being one of the most uncomfortable positions you're likely to ever find yourself in you seem to be in pretty good shape.

The potential for bifurcation, defective pleading, missing paperwork, unclean hands and equity maxims...

Yep, you're in pretty good shape.

Quote 0 0
Vincent R.

You would think, however, as my attorney in NJ points out, many of the judges aren't as open minded to accept these arguments, the old you signed up, took the money and didn't pay, end of story, everything else is irrelevant.   

Quote 0 0
     One other thing to look at is whether or not the Note is a counterfeit
color photocopy or the real one. Feel for pressure ridges on the opposite
side of the signature page. When a person signs a document, the signature
leaves pressure ridges on the opposite side of the page which are palpable.
     On a color copy counterfeit, the other side of the page will be smooth
to the touch indicating a color photocopy.
     Also,the solvent in a yellow magic marker will indicate blue ink by causing
a smear if ink is present. On a color photocopy, since no ink is present, the
solvent won't cause a smear. Test it for yourself and then ask to do the test
at the summary judgement hearing in front of the Judge.
     Finally, always look for problems with the plaintiff's case and file a counter affidavit exposing them. Otherwise, you will lose.
Quote 0 0
Just read this post. I can send you my attny's motion to dismiss sj in my nj case.  Bank's SJ was denied!!! Judge had lots of questions for bank's attny that he could not answer. We also got an expert witness report for my case... that was very helpful! The expert explained that Original lender (Argent that was out of business when foreclosure was filed) could not assign to Trustee (Deutsche suing)... that never happened.  Expert explained in his report that original lender and trustee DID NOT have any dealings... that's not how securitization works!!!
There was also a 53-page decision and order by a judge in atlantic county on june 30th 2010, giving details on MERS, UCC, securitization, and of course dismissing bank's foreclosure case!!! It has lots of NJ case laws (you know those are difficult to come by in foreclosure cases).  Great Exhibit for your case!
Anyway, i'm out of town now and will be back tomorrow night.
Quote 0 0
Who did you use as an expert witness, if you dont mind me asking.  I need somebody very good for a NY case.  Thanks in advance.
Quote 0 0

That would be great Angela much appreciated.  Please send when you can.

Quote 0 0
On my nj case i used Lane Houk as Expert Witness, however, the law firm that i work for has used Lynn Szymoniak for a number of cases.
I sent the motion in opposition of sj to Ann and asked her to scrub pertinent info and send to you, as the case is still ongoing.. summary judgment was denied, so trial will be later.

Quote 0 0

I am still waiting for Vincent to e-mail me his e-mail address so I can send the documents. Thanks

Quote 0 0
Thanks Ann, Angela

We submitted my motion cross motion yesterday to dismiss the case.  My main argument is judicial estoppel, they took a position in the BK court and now are taking another in the foreclosure suit.  We'll see what happens.  Thanks again for all the help.
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...