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
Ben
There was an interesting decision on a motion to dismiss in a Texas case in December 2011:

[i]Jane McCarthy v. Bank of America, NA, No. 4:11-CV-356-A (Tex. N.D. Dec. 22 2011)[/b]
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=17529539911698668377

Is anyone familiar with this case? Have there been any important new developments since that decision??

Also, does anyone have any insight or knowledge into Texas foreclosure law?
Quote 0 0

   This is a great case to cite and supports my view that when the Note and mortgage get transferred
to different entities, one has a cause of action for Quiet Title.
    As stated in the decision, a mortgage without a Note is a nullity. A note without a mortgage is
unsecured and can not be foreclosed. (However, the Note holder could sue, get a judgment, and
record a certified copy of it in O.R., which would cause it to be secured).

    As I understand it, Texas is a "non judicial" foreclosure State, which uses mainly "Trust Deeds"
instead of "mortgages" as in Florida. Both States are similar in that they have the unlimited Homestead
exemption, which as proven by former Gouvenor John Connally, can be used to save the "ranch" by
filing Ch 7 after a judgment is entered, but before a certified copy of it is recorded. He listed the
judgment as unsecured and the ranch as homesteaded. The Trustee discharged the judgment and
"abandoned" the ranch, ie returned it to him, minus his cattle, his gun collection, his wardrobe and
everything else he had, but at least he wasn't "homeless". He had sharp lawyers working his case.

 

Quote 0 0
Texas
Mike H

You forget about temporary perfection and Quiet Title action not as easy as one thinks.
Quote 0 0
   The fact of the matter is that it is quite common for the Note to get separated from the mortgage.
When this happens, the Note becomes unsecured and the mortgage is like a "wild deed" which needs
to be purged from official records by way of a Quiet title action. It is the best way to remove the
lien if the original lender no longer exists.
   If the Note is no longer secured, it can be wiped out in a Ch 7 BK or "crammed down" in a Ch 13.
Quote 0 0
I urge everyone reading this blog to read the case posted by Ben. It is a straight forward explanation of the
issue of bifurcation of the note from the mortgage. It was decided by a judge and it affirms every
thing i've been advocating with regard to quiet title. 
Quote 0 0
Hey Texas,

Send me an email.  My drive crashed and I lost you.  I have a question or two.

Thanks,
Bob
Quote 0 0
$&?!
Quote:
Wrong Tom, the answer has been posted, just not in this forum.

Why not post a link to the resource that you think provides a useful answer?
Quote 0 0
Jane McCarthy vs Bank of America; The Honorable Judge John McBryde ordered Bank of America to bring evidence they owned the details.note at Pre Trial Conference by 7/11/2013. Apparently, they weren't able to do that. They're settling with Jane McCarthy. Google Jane McCarthy vs Bank of America settles for details.
Quote 0 0
Art
Texas, take a look at the original decision posted at the top which began this thread. From this decision:
Quote:
Plaintiff's amended complaint ("Complaint") asserted the following claims against defendants: (1) breach of contract; (2) violations of the Texas Finance Code and the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act ("DTPA"); (3) unreasonable collection; (4) negligent misrepresentation and gross negligence; and (5) suit to quiet title.
This mention in the Judge's decision might be an indicator that McCarthy had made a quiet title claim. I share the concerns of others about what actually transpired. 
Quote 0 0
Write a reply...