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
From Undisclosed source

Quote 0 0

From undisclosed source.
Warning: Law is very complex. Foreclosure law involves many state and federal laws. If you use these documents, you do so at your own risk. We recommend you consult a lawyer before using these documents or representing yourself in court.


1) Motion to Quash Service of Process;
2) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Verification of Complaint;
3) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing - version 1;
4) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing - version 2;
5) Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Standing - version 3;
6) Motion to Dismiss - Verification, Standing, Capacity, Trust issues - Version 1;
7) Motion to Dimiss - Post Bankruptcy - Version 1;
8) Motion to Dismiss - "Successor" Language is Vague - Version 1; Order on Successor Language being Vague;
9) Motion to Dismiss - Assistant Secretary Issue (won last week);
10) Motion to Dismiss - latest;


1) Answer and Affirmative Defenses - version 1;
2) Answer and Affirmative Defenses - version 2;
3) Answer and Affirmative Defenses - version 3 (newest);

A) Informal:

1) Qualified Written Request - version 1;
2) Qualified Written Request - version 2;
3) Letter - Demand for Debt Verification and to Cease Contact;
Corporate Representative Deposition. (version 1)
5) Corporate Representative Deposition. (version 2 - newer/better)

B) Formal:

(i) Interrogatories:
1) Interrogatories - version 1;
2) Interrogatories - version 2;
3) Notice of Service of Interrogatories;

(ii) Request for Production:
1) Request for Production - version 1;
2) Request for Production - version 2;
3) Notice of Service of Request for Production;

(iii) Request for Admissions: (Note: Admissions are highly tactical and may seem confusing)
1) Request for Admissions - version 1;
2) Request for Admissions - version 2;
3) Request for Admissions - version 3A;
4) Request for Admissions - version 3B;
5) Request for Admissions - version 4;
6) Notice of Service of Request for Admissions;

C) Compelling Discovery:

(i) Prerequisite to filing - Attempted Discovery Resolution:
1) Letter to opposing counsel;

(ii) Motions:
1) Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories;
2) Notice of Hearing on Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories;
3) Motion for Sanctions for Failure to Respond to Order Compelling Responses to Interrogatories;
4) Notice of Hearing on Motion for Sanctions;


1) Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment - version 1;
2) Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment - version 2;


1) Motion to Set Aside Summary Judgment - version 1;


The Entire Fastiggi Trial Transcript, with closing argument and the court's findings is available here. Before you do a foreclosure trial, you need to read this transcript and see how we kept the bank from getting documents into evidence. The issue of an equitable lien will be appealed.



1) Jones Appeal, initial brief;
2) Peacock appeal, initial brief;
3) Taylor appeal:
a. initial brief;
b. answer brief;
c. reply brief;
d. decision;
e. motion for rehearing;
f. motion for certification to the Supreme Court;
4) Lyttle appeal, initial brief.



Fake Notes:
Have you seen your "original note" in the court file? Is your signature on it in electric blue/green ink? Our belief is that this electric blue/green ink is a fraud and we are working hard to put together a team of experts and proper equipment to challenge the authenticity of such signatures. It may be that the fraudsters are using a computer controlled mechanical pen to make that fraudulent signature, like this one (click here for demo) and (click here for types of machines). If the signature is a fraud, the judge may dismiss the case against you with prejudice for "fraud on the court". Some of these signature machines, like the Ghostwriter, can vary the pen pressure! And, if you think a bank wouldn't resort to dirty tricks, just take a look at the Lyttle appeal.

Original Papers?
Paper, ink, printers and their interaction with each other in the proof of fraud are very complex. (Click here for Amjur article on Proof of Identification of Paper in Litigation) There is an informative article on the use of forensic examiners in the medical malpractice field that you ought to read to get a working knowledge of what this subject is about. (Click here) The issues that seem obvious as proof of fraud aren't exhaustive. Forensics is extremely broad and your intuition may lead you to use other forensic techniques to prove fraud. (Click here for a website on forensic evidence) An analysis of the ink on the document may determine the year the ink was made. An analysis on the ink for encoded pixels may determine the make, model and year of the printer that made the document. If that ink or printer was made after your loan was signed, someone committed fraud! (Click here for an article on Ink Deposition Analysis) An analysis of the paper on a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer may produce further incriminating evidence - we are working on getting one of those machines. We will keep you posted on this issue.

If you get sued, you have a very short time to respond - 20 days. Don't file an "Answer", instead, file a motion to dismiss, a motion for a more definite statement and/or a motion to strike. Save that Answer for later. It buys you more time in the home, plus, why would you want to hand over your home to a bank that isn't the owner of the note? That is like handing the keys to your car to the first car thief that demands you give it to them. Sample motions are below. Also, reading appeal documents can give you a good basis to beginning to understand the law. The Jones appeal, below, gives you an understanding of how to challenge a judgment when you have waited to file your Notice of Appeal beyond the 30 days after a final judgment has issued. The Peacock appeal concerns the impact of a homeowners Request for Admissions which was ignored by a circuit judge at summary judgment. The Taylor appeal, which the appellate court has ruled against, is a great road map.

Great websites: Foreclosure Hamlet; 4ClosureFraud; StopForeclosureFraud;
Mario Kenny WordPress

Quote 0 0

Is there something wrong with all your links?  I cannot get any of them to open.
Quote 0 0

Try this link

Quote 0 0

Here we again have Anh posting under the "Unregistered" user ID and then answering her own posts using her other alias "Ann".


This Anh is a disturbed person who has exceptionally poor judgment and who SPAMs the Forum on behalf of several disreputable Florida attorneys.


If you see a post by "Unregistered" or "Ann" be sure to avoid the inferior and exceptionally poor legal work she trumpets and tell ALL of your friends (and anyone who wants to avoid the loss of their home) to AVOID the dishonest attorneys she promotes in her SPAM posts!

Quote 0 0
An interesting article written by a lawyer about Foreclosure Arsenal Defenses ideas.

For information only. Do your research carefully before hiring any lawyer.
Quote 0 0

Affirmative Defenses

Courtesy of

This is a collection of possible affirmative defenses. Some of the defenses may not apply to your case; therefore do not blindly cut and paste them into your pleading. Carefully analyze each to ensure that it fits your situation. If you just received a foreclosure summon, do no rush to file an answer. You should ask for more time from the judge by filing a Motion To Enlarge Time. A Motion to Dismiss will also toll the time for filing an answer. Use that extra time to research your case. Learn as much as you can the foreclosure procedure in your local area.

1. Standing. The Plaintiff is not registered to do business in the State of Florida and therefore unable to maintain this action and the court does not have jurisdiction. See Fla. Stat. 607.1502(1) and 607.1501(a), (g) and (h).
The complaint fails to join indispensable parties, specifically the loan originator and the loan servicer(s) and the complaint fails to adequately show the chain of title demonstrating that Plaintiff is in fact the real party in interest with standing to bring this action.

2. Unclean Hands. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest had unclean hands in their course of dealing with Defendant because the several facts alleged herein below, and Plaintiff also wrongfully refused reinstatement.

3. Violation of TILA. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest violated various provisions of the Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), which is codified at 15 U.S.C. section 1601 et seq. and Regulation Z section 226 et seq. by interalia:
a) failing to deliver to the Defendant two copies of notice of the right to rescind (with all of the pertinent statutory disclosures)
b) failing to properly and accurately disclose the "amount financed"
c) failing to clearly and accurately disclose the "finance charge"
d) failing to clearly and accurately disclose the "total of payments"
e) failing to clearly and accurately disclose the "annual percentage rate"
f) failing to clearly and accurately disclose the number, amounts and timing of payments scheduled to repay the obligation
g) failing to clearly and accurately itemize the amount financed.
The transaction was subject to TILA and rescission rights since it was a consumer credit transaction involving a lien or security interest placed on the Defendant's principal dwelling, and was not a residential mortgage as defined in 15 U.S.C. 1602(w), because the mortgage was not created to finance the acquisition of the dwelling. As a result, Defendant is entitled to rescind the transaction and elect to do so.

4. Violation of RESPA. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest violated various provision of the Real Estate Settlement Procedure Act ("RESPA"), which is codified at 12 U.S.C. section 2601, et seq. by, interalia:

a) Failing to provide the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) special information booklet, a Mortgage Servicing Disclosure Statement and Good Faith Estimate of settlement/closing costs to Defendants at the time of the loan application or with three (3) days thereafter;

b) Failing to provide Defendants with an annual Escrow Disclosure Statement for each
of year of the mortgage since its inception;

c) Giving or accepting fees, kickbacks and/or other things of value in exchange for
referrals of settlement service business, and splitting fees and receiving unearned fees
for services not actually performed;

d) Charging a fee at the time of the loan closing for the preparation of truth-in-lending,
uniform settlement and escrow account statements.

5. Violations of HOEPA. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest violated various provisions of the Home Ownership Equity Protection Act ("HOEPA") pursuant to 15 USC § 1639 et seq. by failing to make proper disclosures and committing intentional predatory lending by including prohibited terms. These violations provide an extended three year right to rescission and enhanced monetary damages for the Defendants.

6. Extortionate Extension of Credit. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest are guilty of an extortionate extension of credit pursuant to §687.071(1)(e), Florida Statutes, which defines it as "any extension of credit whereby it is the understanding of the creditor and the debtor at the time an extension of
credit is made that delay in making repayment or failure to make repayment could result in the use of violence or other criminal means to cause harm to the person, reputation, or propeliy of any person." In this case, Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest are guilty of such an extension of credit because at the time of the loan, it was understood that Defendants' failure to repay the loan could result in the use of criminal means by the
Plaintiff to cause harm to Defendants' or others' persons, reputation or property, including trespass on Defendant's property, perjury, mail and wire fraud, and Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) violations, as long as Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest thought they would not be caught.

7. Fraud. Upon information and belief, the alleged Note and Mortgage and other loan documents, were induced by the fraud of the Plaintiff and its predecessors in interest and its co-conspirators, and are therefore void and unenforceable. Specifically, the originator of the loan and its co-conspirators made the following representations: a) Before the loan was made, the originator and/or its co-conspirators (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest") represented to Defendants that they had superior knowledge, information, skill and ability to
Defendants in making mortgage loans, and that they would be looking out for the best interests of Defendants in the financing process and, in effect, protecting and promoting Defendants' benefit;

b) Before the loan was made, the Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest represented to Defendants that:
(1) Defendants would receive the best mortgage available
(2) that it would be a "good" loan, and
(3) it would be of substantial benefit to Defendants.

c) The representations described in a) and b) above were made for the purpose of inducing Defendants to enter into the loan transaction.

d) The representations were false and known by Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest to be false at the time the representations were made and at the time the loan was made, in that:

e) The Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest did not have superior knowledge, information, skill and ability to Defendants in making mortgage loans as represented or did not use the same for the benefit and best interest of Defendants;
f) The Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest did not look out for Defendants' best
interest or protect and promote Defendants' benefit;

g) Defendants did not receive the best loan available;

h) The loan was not a "good" loan;

i) The loan was not in Defendants' best interest, but rather was in the best interest and to the benefit of the Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest;

j) Defendants reasonably relied on the representations by the Plaintiff and/or its predecessor( s) in interest to their detriment.

k) The Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest failed to disclose all costs, fees and expenses; charged excessive fees, gave kickbacks and made payments of fees to parties not entitled to receive them, and failed to provide Defendants with all disclosures required by law.

1) To confuse, bamboozle and defraud Defendants, the Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest intentionally scheduled the closing with insufficient time at the closing for Defendants to have the time to actually read the documents requiring Defendants' signature.
m) Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest, with the intent to defraud, intentionally failed to provide the loan closing documents in advance of the closing.

n) The only parties who benefited from the loan were the Plaintiff and/or its
predecessor(s) in interest and their service providers.

8. Payment. Upon information and belief, Defendants have made all payments required by law under the circumstances; however Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest improperly applied such payments resulting in the fiction that Defendants were in default. Defendants are entitled to a full accounting through the master transaction histories and general ledgers for the account since a dump or summary of said information cannot be
relied upon to determine the rightful amounts owed.

Further, the principal balance claimed as owed is not owed and is the wrong amount, the loan has not been properly credited or amortized. Additionally, Plaintiff placed Forced Insurance on the property and is attempting to collect on property taxes, insurance and fees not owed.

9. Violation of Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Upon information and belief, in addition to the facts alleged in the preceding paragraphs, the Plaintiff and/or Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest also violated the Unfair and Deceptive Trade Practices Act, F.S. 501.201, et seq. by:

a) Failing to promptly and/or properly pay taxes or insurance premiums when due, so that the maximum tax discount available to Defendants could be obtained on Defendants' property and so that insurance coverage on the property would not lapse.

b) Failing to provide Defendants with an annual statement of the escrow account kept for payment of taxes and insurance.

c) Failing to properly disclose at or prior to closing all costs, fees and expenses associated with the loan;

d) Charging excessive fees and making payments of fees to parties not entitled to receive them;

e) Obtaining a yield spread premium (YSP) based upon the "selling" of a higher interest rate, and/or non disclosure of the range of interest rates for which Defendants qualified.
f) All such actions by Plaintiff and/or its predecessor(s) in interest are unconscionable acts or practices, and/or unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct oftrade or commerce in violation of §501.204, Florida Statutes, and entitle the Defendants to a setoff, recoupment or civil penalty, nominal and actual damages, attorney's fees and costs.

10. Unconscionability. In light of all of the foregoing defenses, and on the face of the purported loan documents, the terms and circumstances of the Note and Mortgage were unconscionable when made and were unconscionably exercised, it is unconscionable to enforce the Mortgage by foreclosure.

11. Failure to Join Indispensable Party. Plaintiff has failed to join an indispensable party. Willey v. W. J. Hoggson Corporation, 90 Fla. 343, 106 So. 408 (1925), contends that since the note and mortgage involved in this litigation are payable to a business trust, any action on those instruments must be brought by all the members of the trust-not just the trustees.

12. Rescission. The mortgage and note which are the subject of this action have been rescinded and therefore the mortgage(s) and note(s) are void.

13. Unclean Hand. Plaintiff has unclean hands due to its actions described below and therefore is prohibited from obtaining equitable relief of foreclosure. As a matter of equity, this Court should refuse to foreclose this mortgage because acceleration of this note would be inequitable, unjust, and unconscionable. Plaintiff has waived the right to acceleration due to intentionally misleading and reckless conduct for which it is liable.

14. Lack of Jurisdiction. This court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter. It appears on the face of the complaint that a person other than the Plaintiff was the true owner of the claim sued upon at the time this action was filed and that the Plaintiff is not the real party in interest and is not shown to be authorized to bring this foreclosure action.

15. Failure to Provide FDCPA Notice. Plaintiff brought this action without providing notice to Defendant of Defendant's right to dispute the debt, pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act. As indicated in the Notice attached to the Complaint, filed September 1, 2007, but not served upon Defendant until April 13, 2008. Plaintiff is required to notify Defendant, pursuant to 15 U.S.C §§ 1601, et seq., that Defendant may dispute the debt and Plaintiff is required to provide verisifcation fo the debt. Defendant hereby disputes the debt and demands that Plaintiff verify the debt in accordance with the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act. Plaintiff is required to suspend litigation until verification of the debt at issue.

16. Duress.
a) Plaintiff alleges ownership of the note and mortgage in question.
b) Plaintiff is liable for actions of ABC Mortgage and/or its agents.
c) ABC Mortgage and/or its agent used unjustified pressure to make Mr. Doe sign the mortgage, including telling him that he would be liable for the closing costs if he did not go through with closing.
d) Mr. Doe was harmed by ABC Mortgage's action.

17. Failure to State a Claim for Which Relief May Be Granted.
a) Plaintiff filed a claim to re-establish a lost note.
b) Plaintiff claims the right to re-establish such note under Fla. Stat. §673.3091.
c) Fla. Stat. §673.3091 provides only for re-establishment of negotiable instruments as defined under Fla. Stat. §673.1041.
d) The note at issue is not a negotiable instrument as defined under §673.1041 because it does not contain an unconditional promise to pay and/or other requirements to qualify as a negotiable instrument.
e) Therefore Fla. Stat. §673.1041 does not apply to transfer or enforce the promissory note at issue in this foreclosure action.
f) Therefore, Plaintiff has failed to state a claim for which relief may be granted.
18. Failure to Timely Serve Complaint.
a) Complaint was filed on February 13, 2008.
b) However, Defendant was served on July 3, 2008.
c) Pursuant to Fl. R. Civ. Pro. 1.070(j), Defendant is required to be served within 120 days after filing of the initial pleading.
d) Plaintiff served Defendant approximately 170 days after filing the initial pleading.

19. Fraud in The Inducement.
i. Plaintiff alleges ownership of the note and mortgage in question.
ii. Plaintiff is liable for actions of ABC Mortgage and/or its agents.
iii. ABC Mortgage and/or its agents made false statements and/or omissions regarding a material fact;
iv. ABC Mortgage and/or its agents knew or should have known the representation was false;
v. ABC Mortgage and/or its agents intended that the representation induce plaintiff to act on it;
vi. Mr. Doe suffered damages in justifiable reliance on the representation.

20. Quiet Title.
Plaintiffs request this Honorable Court to enter its judgment against Defendants declaring the Mortgage, null and void; canceling the Mortgage of record; quieting title to the property owned by Plaintiffs and against Defendants and all persons claiming under Defendants; and granting costs of this action and such other relief as the Court may deem proper.

21. No Written Notice Of Consumer Debt Assignment.
Pursuant to F.S 559.715 Plaintiff must give Defendant written notice of the debt assignment within 30 days after the assignment.

22. Promissory Note Not Authentic.
Defendant, pursuant to F.S 673.3081 challenges the authenticity of each signature on the Note introduced by the Plaintiff.

This is not legal advice. Consult an attorney.
Quote 0 0


Quote 0 0

How to Find a Competent Foreclosure Attorney

Courtesy of

If you can afford an attorney, it is advisable to hire one to defend your foreclosure. The big “if” of course is affordability. Having said that, we should keep in mind that all attorneys are not created equal. An incompetent attorney can cost you money and your case; there are enough of them to be wary. Here is some advice in finding a good foreclosure attorney.
Once the initial foreclosure complaint is filed by the plaintiff, your name and address will become public record and will be available for mass mailing. You will certainly receive numerous solicitations from local attorneys. Armed with the solicitation letters, go to your county clerk web site and do a party search on some of the attorneys on your list. Some counties’ system allows you to do searches by parties; some systems do have that functionality. Once you’re able to pull a list of cases with the attorney as a defense counsel, check the docket entries. Has the attorney been fighting vigorously for his/her clients?

First consultation of a lawyer usually is free. Interview at least 5 lawyers.

By reviewing a few cases, you can determine how good an attorney is.
Has he files any pre-answer motions?
Has he filed any affirmative defenses and counter –claims?
Was he persistent in his discovery method?
What is his win/lose ratio?

If you want more information beyond dockets review, go to the court house and request to see the files you’re interested in. Read the pleadings filed by the attorney. You can even make copies to take home. Once you feel comfortable with an attorney’s competence, then you should make the jump. There is no guaranty, but at least you made an educated guess.

Quote 0 0
Ann and Unregistered must be a shill for Carol Asbury's Law Firm - though this pig is in jail - there are others pigs running the Law Firm


Quote 0 0

Ann and Unregistered must be a shill for Carol Asbury's Law Firm - though this pig is in jail - there are others pigs running the Law Firm




"Pig" would be far too complementary a term for SPAM slime-bucket Anh, who has continuously assaulted and debased this site through her many garbage SPAM posts on behalf of dishonest Florida attorneys.


She has repeatedly posted links to the 4closurefraud scam website of Carol Asbury's law firm.  


Slowly, but surely, the authorities are beginning to round up and prosecute Anh's various confederates and not a moment too soon.  She has done immeasurable damage to the cause of foreclosure defense by her promotion of various dishonest attorneys.  It is so offensive to watch as she continues her unabated attacks here at the Forum.  She seems to be dedicated to the destruction of the MS Fraud site, which was once the primary site for foreclosure defense, but which has now been drowned out by the many competing scam sites Anh promotes.  It really turns one's stomach to realize that this SPAM bit©h has been allowed to harm so many people.  She is clearly a very vile person unworthy of any friendship, trust or defense by anyone here at the site.


A surprise soon awaits Anh for her criminal enterprise!

Quote 0 0
I have no connection with Carol Ashbury or I don't work for any lawyer. 
Some people on this site do not want readers to know  foreclosure defense news, Appeal Court winning case opinions, how to fight foreclosure, good pleading samples. Wonder why ?
Quote 0 0

Lets put an end to this right now, Is your name Anh????  Do your know Carol Ashbury or have you ever had any dealings with this person??  Very straight forward questions.......
Quote 0 0
John Lewis


Quote: [Very straight forward questions.......]


rest assured that a very very long post that has nothing whatsoever to do with your ? will be followed by Ann ... then another very long post by Anh ... followed by another very long post [again having nothing to do with any subject matter in this thread] will be posted by unregistered.  DROWNING OUT EVERYTHING ABOVE --


or --


she will simply delete your post ......


Ann, Anh and unregistered = Ann = Anh = unregistered = "SPAM bit©h"

Quote 0 0
Quote from W. Roper ...


In the course of watching various posts to this Message Board and in hearing from several participants in this Forum, I have become increasingly concerned about what appears to be a misunderstanding or misapprehension regarding how critical it is to file an ANSWER to a judicial complaint or petition in foreclosure.

This post comes with the usual admonission that I am NOT an attorney and CANNOT give any of you legal advice. When you are served with court papers -- any official process showing that you are being sued -- you need to endeavor to find and consult a lawyer IMMEDIATELY. And frankly, you also need to very quickly become as well informed as reasonably possible concerning the subject matter of the suit.

The Danger of a Default Judgment
In most states, if a person is sued and fails to timely answer, the plaintiff can obtain a default judgment against that person. Just like a team failing to show up for ball game, if one fails to show up in a judicial adversarial proceeding, in most states, you will LOSE.

Moreover, in most states, after a plaintiff obtains an order or judgment, there is typically a limited amount of time during which the order or judgment can be appealed. If the plaintiff gets a default judgment, the plaintiff will then very often WAIT until the appeal period runs to begin to take further actions.

The process VARIES from state to state. But in most instances of judicial foreclosure, the defendant is sued under the promissory note under the UCC, while the plaintiff simultaneously seeks a judicial order of foreclosure in equity. Plaintiff strategies vary. But letting the plaintiff get a default under either the promissory note OR the mortgage is usually a very BAD thing.

In most places, after an order or judgment is entered by a trial court, that court loses jurisdiction to set aside its own orders, even if ERRONEOUS, after a certain period of time. Similarly, appellate courts both gain and lose jurisdiction after an order is finalized through the passage of time. That is, an appellate court is typically only entitled to DISTURB a lower court's ruling while that appellate court has jurisdiction over the matter.

So when the appellate period PASSES, the borrower usually LOSES the right to bring an appeal! Moreover, even when appeals are HEARD, many courts limit the arguments that may be made on appeal to issues raised in the lower court. If the borrower fails to make arguments in the lower court, these arguments are frequently deemed WAIVED when the matter is taken up on appeal. So when a borrower LOSES by a default judgment, very often not only has the borrower lost the very first (and usually conclusive round), but also the borrower may have WAIVED some of the very best defensive arguments!

As with any rules their ARE EXCEPTIONS. The exceptions are many and varied and the laws of the borrower's jurisdiction need to be consulted to ascertain whether a matter may be reopened later. If you have already suffered a default judgment, you should still consult a lawyer!

Motion for a New Trial
If you have already suffered a default, READ THE Rules and consult with a lawyer to learn whether you are still eligible to file a motion for a new trial. Do NOT count on getting a new trial. Do your utmost to avoid default. But IF you have suffered a default, check with a lawyer and explore your options.

Restricted Appeal or Bill of Review
Some jurisdictions allow some form of restricted appeal of judgments or for erroneous orders to be set aside by bill of review for a longer period than the normal appeals period. Most often, the later appeal or bill of review is possible only where there is some showing that the defendant was effectively denied an opportunity to make their case, as in when notice was defective or where some material official mistake was made.

There are many cases assuring that defendants are accorded due process rights, and particularly effective, timely notice of adversarial proceedings.

I mention these NOT to give anyone a reason to DELAY, but rather to better assure that those in doubt about their individual circumstances consult a qualified attorney in thier jurisdiction to explore their alternatives.

The THEME of this post, rather, is that it is imperative to AVOID allowing the plaintiff to obtain a default judgment.

Look To Your State's Court Rules and Statutes
Most states have Court Rules which govern civil litigation. Very often these will be called something like the "Rules of Civil Procedure" or "Rules of Court". These vary from state to state and get complicated quickly, so unless you have a very strong legal background, time, patience and a commitment to research, you need to look to an attorney to explain to you what these Rules mean.

But this doesn't mean that you shouldn't acquaint yourself with the Rules. Look the Rules for your state up and READ THEM. Most are available ONLINE. Read them TWICE or THREE TIMES. Then re-read the petition or complaint against you and read the Rules once more.

The Rules will generally set out the time period during which the defendant must ANSWER. And the Rules will usually set forth the circumstances under which a plaintiff is entitled to a default judgment.

Other particularly critical aspects of the Rules as they pertain to the answer include the parties' ability to later supplement and/or amend pleadings. These are the sorts of Rules that vary widely between and amngst the states. Some states allow liberal amendment to the pleadings for an extended period of time. Other states restrict amendments.

The time frame within which the defendant is permitted to answer and the liberality in allowing amendments should usually control the balance between getting things precisely RIGHT and getting things done ON TIME.

The KEY idea is that when properly SERVED, the defendant DOES need to timely answer and the first answer may need to be more or less complete depending upon the Rules as they pertain to amended pleadings.

In reading the Rules, bear in mind that there may be certain other procedural enactments BY STATUTE rather than by RULE. The Statutes and the Rules need to be READ TOGETHER, as in some instances these evolved and devloped separately.

A Note About Service and Special Appearance
To emphasize the complexity of things, it is helpful to add that there exists a special circumstance under which an answer MIGHT prove to be undesirable. But this circumstance is so arcane that it cries out for you to consult a LAWYER.

The unusual circumstance would be where the person named in the suit papers wasn't ever properly SERVED with the suit papers. Suppose, for example, that you were on a business trip to Los Angeles and the suit papers were personally served on another person (other than yourself) at OTHER THAN your place of business or place of residence in Cleveland. Suppose that rather than serving John Q. SMITH at 1234 Main Street that the suit papers are serve on John A. SMYTHE at 1243 Colts' Mane Road. SMYTHE has signed for the papers. John Q. SMITH never received them. SMYTHE and SMITH are unrelated. SMITH can PROVE that he was in Los Angeles on the date of the alleged service.

The circumstances stated above are deliberately stark. There are obviously many more ambiguous cases.

These include MISNOMER cases where the wrong person was named and served and SERVICE cases where the right person was named but the suit papers were served on the wrong person at the wrong place. Some states, such as Texas, prohibit service on Sundays and Sunday service is therefore inherently DEFECTIVE.

The entire area is a minefield and requires a very capable lawyer and a very careful study of applicable cases. But the point is this... When the defendant ANSWERS, the defendant typically WAIVES any defects in service. So IF there is any notice-related defense to the suit (which defense is USUALLY CURED by simply CORRECTING the service defect -- a speed bump for the plaintiff rather than a brick wall), it is important to bear in mind that answering may WAIVE this defense.

There exists in most jurisdictions a special sort of answer called a "special appearance" wherein the defendant answers ONLY to challenge the Court's jurisdiction in the case. And sometimes, such a special appearance can be made in conjunction with an alternative answer. The bottom line though is that unless your notice problem is particularly stark it is probably best to ANSWER in some way rather than to risk a default (this might take the form of special appearance OR of special appearance with alternative answer). But because this is NOT universally true, the best answer is to CONSULT A LAWYER about the advisability of answering. But PLEASE do NOT hesitate to read the Rules YOURSELF and to answer in some way if you have been properly served and do not have or cannot afford a lawyer!

The General Denial
Some jurisdictions allow a defendant to simply generally deny the plaintiff's complaint or petition. The general denial might be as simple as "I generally deny each and every allegation and claim of the plaintiff and demand strict proof of the same", or similar words to this effect.

Look to YOUR STATE's Rule's as to WHETHER a general denial is adequate. Look to legal form's books in YOUR STATE for a standard legal form for a general denial that is acceptable for use in YOUR STATE. But it would be BEST to consult a lawyer with knowledge and experience in consumer debt / foreclosure and even bankruptcy law.

If you MUST file something pro se, and plead various special defenses, investigate whether a blanket general denial is also allowed.

Bear in mind that a general denial in most states is (a) going to constitute an appearance negating any claims regarding defect in service [if not plead in conjunction with a special appearance] and (b) will PRECLUDE the plaintiff from getting an immediate default judgment [though the defendant is still going to have to MAKE subsequent scheduled court appearances for hearings and trials].

Challenges To Jurisdiction and Capacity
In most places, a general denial will NOT serve to raise a jurisdictional question as to the plaintiff's standing. Neither will it usually raise the issue of the plaintiff's capacity. These usually need to be expressly and separately pled.

This Post is NOT about jurisdiction and capacity, but rather about the importance of answering. Defendants are encouraged to study the law and the Rules of thier own jurisdiction to ascertain HOW to plead defects as to jurisdiction and capacity. There is also some other good discussion relating to standing and capacity in other posts within this forum.

It would generally be BEST to consult a capable lawyer!

Other Defects In Parties
Identifiable defects in parties may also need to be expressly pled, sometimes as a plea in abatement. Bear in mind that in Equity, usually ALL of the necessary parties must be before the Court in order to obtain the requested relief. So if everyone (to include other lien holders) is not named and before the court, this can be a valid reason to delay the foreclosure until the defect is cured.

One must balance the desirability to interpose valid defenses with the advisability of showing the plaintiff too any of their mistakes too early. A defect in parties MIGHT be something to save for an amended pleading, IF amendments are freely allowed. This is a tactical question and the correct answer may not only depend upon the LAW, but also the identity and personality of the judge. This is yet another example of why it is HELPFUL to get an attorney who is an experience litigator and who is ACQUAINTED with your judge and practice before that judge.

Affirmative Defenses
Again, there are often a number of affirmative defenses that a borrower might plead including TIL and RESPA violations, fraud, failure of consideration, accord and satisfaction, failure to satisfy conditions precedent, usary, limitations, and especially equitable defenses such as the "clean hands doctrine", laches, and "failure of the plaintiff to do equity" [these are intended to be exemplary NOT exhaustive].

In some states, certain affirmative defenses must be pled under oath. Obviously, the defendant must AVOID interposing frivolous or unfounded defenses, and this must be particularly avoided when the defendant must SWEAR to the defense.

If you engage an attorney, then the attorney should be readily able to prepare your answer to include applicable affirmative defenses. If you must prepare your own answer, you need to carefully weigh premature inclusion of defenses against the difficulty in amending the pleading later.

Making the Same Argument in More Than One Way
Sometimes precisely the same FACTS give rise to more than one argument or the same argument presented in slightly different ways. For example, suppose that the plaintiff bringing the action doesn't actually OWN the mortgage indebtedness. This might give rise to a plea to the jurisdiction citing standing and/or real party in interest. It may give rise to a capacity argument. It might also give rise to a plea in abatement alleging that all of the necessary parties have not been named and served and are therefore NOT beforethe court. Similarly, in some jurisdictions, a party may be required to identify certain pleading defects by special exception, requesting the court strike the excepted pleadings and allowing the other party to replead. In those states, the standing problem might also be correctly pled as a special exception as to defect in parties.

One needs to be careful and cognizant NOT to make arguments which are contradictory (EXCEPT in the altrernative) or which appear to be unnecessarily repetitive or repetitious. But an argument might gain better traction clothed one way than the other.

Getting the arguments focused and RIGHT can require a LOT of research, thinking and WORK!

Everybody Needs To Answer
One MISTAKE I have already encountered in postings and correspondence is for less than ALL of the identifiable defendants to ANSWER. For example, suppose that John and Mary SMITH are named and served with the suit, BOTH John SMITH AND Mary SMITH need to ANSWER the suit.

In one instance, someone showed me the complaint and their answer and I asked if the other person (spouse) had answered. When I asked this, I learned that a default had already been enterred against the non-answering spouse.

When John and Mary SMITH engage an attorney, he can usually ANSWER for both defendant's usually in the same pleading. Where John and Mary SMITH are answering pro se, BOTH John SMITH and Mary SMITH may need to answer and occasionally, in some jurisdictions, they may need to answer separately.

That is because neither of these defendant's is permitted to act as the attorney for the other and actually neither should really even be preparing pleadings for the other!

If one person answers and the other fails to answer, the plaintiff will usually obtain a default judgment against the person who fails to answer. This can usually be avoided by pro se litigants by each filing their own separate answer, even if these are substantially identical.

Signing of the Pleadings
Where represented by an attorney, the attorney usually signs the pleadings on the defendant's behalf and thereby enters an appearance on the defendant's behalf. Those who choose to or must represent themselves pro se, because they cannot find or afford an attorney need to carefully read the law and the Rules for their jurisdiction to ascertain the requisites for a signature on the pleadings.

In some places and in some courts, pro se pleadings must be sworn or at least acknowledged. In certain states, certain defenses must be sworn. In preparing your draft or final answer, READ THE RULES AGAIN and verify that your answer is strictly in compliance.

Usually, each pro se litigant is going to have to sign separately and neither can sign for the other.

Understanding the Law
While I would encourage EVERYBODY litigating to get an attorney, I would separately encourage each person to READ the Court Rules and the statutes which pertain to their individual case, as well as at least to survey leading cases interpretting the law.

This can be very time consuming.

But here is the inherent problem in obtaining good competent representation and mounting an effective defense. The BORROWER tends to best understand the FACTS in the case. The attorney tends to generally better understand the law and courtroom practice. But there is so much law to UNDERSTAND that your attorney cannot be readily familiar with all of the relevant cases pertaining to YOUR facts unless he engages in extensive additional research and reading. And if NOT already an expert, you might have to PAY FOR his study.

I learned this painfully once with respect to a matter of intellectual property law. I engaged the services of a blue chip law firm to prepare some non-disclosure agreements and licensing contracts. At some point in the preparation, I was told that there might be an issue relating to franchise law. An associate at the firm then billed many hours to understand this aspect of franchise law. I was aghast at the legal bill! When I later discussed the matter over drinks with my real estate lawyer, he told me that I had gone to the WRONG lawyer. The lawyer who WROTE THE BOOK on franchise law was practicing just down the street and would have ALREADY KNOWN the answer without the necessity of hours of study or research.

Happily, if you obtain an attorney with consumer debt collection, mortgage foreclosure and/or bankruptcy experience, that attorney will already have a very good grounding in the law as it pertains to YOUR CASE. But much has changed in the mortgage marketplace since older attorneys went to law school. And attorneys unfamiliar with mortgage foreclosure practice cannot readily conceive of of the unethical, unscrupulous and illegal tactics in which attorneys for foreclose mills routinely engage. For a general practictioner or lawyer with a different specialty, there is TOO MUCH reading and learning to do to mount an effective defense without charging the borrower / client far more than the client can afford. So the defendant's attorney will very often have to take short cuts.

In short, most borrowers CANNOT AFFORD to pay their attorneys to LEARN the applicable law, NOR can most borrowers AFFORD to pay their attorneys to become intimately acquainted with the FACTS in thier individual case. So if the defendant wants to be WELL REPRESENTED, the defendant is going to need to leverage their lawyer's legal training and experience with some independant research, reading and preparation by the borrower.

Any borrower that thinks that the average lawyer (other than a SPECIALIST in this area) is prepared and equipped to mount a particularly effective defense doesn't understand the nature and dynamics of the foreclosure problem.

Since the borrower CANNOT usually AFFORD to pay the lawyer to become intimately familiar with the facts of the case or of the applicable law, the borrower should do more than a little independent research to better prepare and to be in a position to help to organize and marshal the facts of their case.

I am NOT arguing against obtaining a lawyer. To the contrary, you NEED a lawyer, but you need to be proactive about your case and you need to be prepared to MANAGE your lawyer. You CANNOT do this by simply delegating the problem without becoming engaged. If you think you are going to simply subcontract to the generalist, I fear you will be even MORE BROKE with little to show for it! Read, think, organize. Get a lawyer, but MANAGE and participate.

Find Example Pleadings
If you CANNOT obtain an attorney and must go the pro se route, look to legal forms books for your state to obtain examples of various kinds of defensive pleadings. Bear in mind that some defensive matters, such as pleas to the jurisdiction, pleas in abatement, and pleas in bar may appear separately from the foreclosure forms of pleading.

Also, consider going to the courthouse and looking through the court files / dockets to see the pleadings used by others. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. There may be some GREAT boilerplate appearing in defensive pleadings filed by others. But also bear in mind that each case is also unique. Be VERY CAREFUL not to simply lift arguments which are irrelevant or inapplicable to your case.

Good defensive pleadings are probably going to be HARD to find! Many defendants lose by default and never file an answer at all. But if your state ALLOWS general denials, there might be an adequate general denial that you might find in a forms book, with additional examples of such denial used in actual practice. Just be VERY, VERY wary of going solely with a general denial IF you have some solid jurisdictional / capacity issues or other good affirmative defenses. You need to be careful NOT to prematurely WAIVE arguments by failing to make them.

Get someone to PROOFREAD your pleadings for spelling, punctuation and grammar. Make your pleadings LOOK PROFESSIONAL. You might even consider trying to summarize YOUR ideas for defensive pleadings and carry your proposed answer in and ask your attorney or ANY attorney to look at it, even if that attorney is NOT going to represent you.

Make Your Deadline
The KEY IDEA of this post though is to make sure that you make your deadlines, so that you do NOT lose by default! A court will typically REFUSE to grant a default judgment based upon a very minimal response. I have seen some case law from some jurisdictions where a copy of the summons returned to the court with the word "Denied" written on it and signed by the defendant was accepted as a valid general denial (I would NOT recommend this! Do it the RIGHT WAY!!). Failing to send ANYTHING is going to earn the plaintiff a default!

Be Prepared To Settle
If the plaintiff gets a default, you have already LOST. If you AVOID a default by ANSWERING, you are already well ahead of most other foreclosure defendants. Getting your answer in prepares you to engage in DISCOVERY.

One of the really surprising things is that like the schoolyard bully who picks on smaller kids, the plaintiff's attorneys are actually LESS READY for real litigation than would seem likely. They are USED TO winning by just showing up. They are used to winning using defective pleadings, false affidavits, and other fabricated evidence! They have RARELY, if EVER, seen an EFFECTIVE defensive pleading. And they are totally unaccustomed to answering good, well thought out discovery questions.

In short, it turns out that the bully really does NOT know how to fight!

The deck is very much legally stacked against the defendant / borrower. But the foreclosure business has become so rife and permeated by corrupt and dishonest practices that a well prepared defendant has a much better chance than might be commonly perceived. This is perhaps the best lesson of the Florida MERS cases. There Florida judges became SO offended by clear patterns of plaintiff misconduct that the Court ruled in favor of defendants even where the defendants had NOT appeared!

The mortgage servicers are planning to roll over most defendants. And the industry is facing a crush of new defaults. Given the choice of applying resources to ten defaulted cases or one contested case, which do you think will command the mortgage investor's attention?

When you RESIST, the mortgage investor may suddently become interested in SETTLING. BEWARE of giving up unnecessary information in any settlement discussions (see other posts at this Forum, particularly those by Moose). And BEWARE of rights given up in settlement. Here is where your need of counsel can be MOST ACUTE.

Settling is a GOOD IDEA where possible. But there are some structural reasons that make settlement particularly problematic where a mortgage trust owns the mortgage indebtedness.

Solicitation of Ideas
I would encourage other veterans of this Forum with ideas and suggestions relating to avoiding default and preparing an initial defensive answer to supplement these musings and suggestions with their own additional insights and experiences!

Get a Lawyer
Permit me to close with that recurring theme. GET A LAWYER! If I FAILED to incorporate this idea into every section above, consider this supplement to be an incorporation by reference.

Quote 0 0

well guess John Lewis was right:

quote Angelo:


"Lets put an end to this right now, Is your name Anh???? Do your know Carol Ashbury or have you ever had any dealings with this person?? Very straight forward questions......."

What is your answer " "SPAM bit©h"

unregistered = Anh = Ann -- ur the lowest of lowest scum!

Quote 0 0

Quote [This post shown to be by "Unregistered" is by the deranged contributor Anh who SPAMs the Forum with links to the web sites of disreputable and unethical Florida attorneys. YOU SHOULD AVOID USING ANY ATTORNEY SUGGESTED BY ANH!"

Quote 0 0

Quote [This is totally LAME!

You ought to be ashamed of yourself, Ann!!"

Quote 0 0

Quote: [

Ann:"The material posted on this forum is for information and entertaining purposes only."

Maybe Ann feels it's "entertaining" to watch people copy the legal pleadings she posts here and on Scribd without understanding what they are saying or mean, then lose their house.

While she may sleep fine at night because she posted to find an attorney, this isn't legal advice, for informational purposes only, or any other kind of disclaimer, posting these uneven pleadings as correct, effective, examples when she is not even sure if they are is doing homeowners a HUGE disservice.

This is akin to leaving a loaded gun on a coffee table in a room full of 5 year olds and telling them not to touch the gun as you go to the store. When the county coroner shows up she can claim "I told them not to touch it".

You will notice that Mr. Roper, George, Bill, CMC, Moose, and all the active posters never post examples of pleadings. They all just attempt to explain the concepts as best they can.

At least after copying Ann's examples the homeowner can say "I lost just like the attorney that prepared the example did".

It's pretty interesting that Ann often "attacks" the "people who want to play lawyers" because they are simply trying to explain the uneven material Ann posts so homeowners understand. "
Quote 0 0

what sez u ""SPAM bit©h"" to Angelo's ?:

"Lets put an end to this right now, Is your name Anh???? Do your know Carol Ashbury or have you ever had any dealings with this person?? Very straight forward questions......."


Quote 0 0

No relationship, no dealing with Carol Ashbury.

Quote 0 0
xyz wrote:
what sez u ""SPAM bit©h"" to Angelo's ?:

"Lets put an end to this right now, Is your name Anh???? Do your know Carol Ashbury or have you ever had any dealings with this person?? Very straight forward questions......."


She has to be connected to Carol's Law Firm - or should we state the Newly renamed - "CIVIL JUSTICE ADVOCATES" - only morons and criminals would still promote companies, law firms etc that are connected to known jailbirds.

There is chatter on the Internet and on news websites that Carol was being investigated as far back has 2007 for the illegal misdeeds that led to her being indicated and pleading guilty.

Criminal all the time while they are breaking laws and victimizing their fellow humans - they will try and hide behind their supposed "good deeds" and legit businesses .......

case in point

The alleged scheme involved payments to straw buyers to pretend they were purchasing high-priced homes in Wellington. Using fraudulent loan documents, participants obtained loans for more than the purchase price and pocketed the difference, according to prosecutors.

In a telephone interview with the ABA Journal, Asbury repeatedly used the word "regret" as she explained that she got into trouble during a rough time in her life when she wasn't paying enough attention to what was going on in her law practice as she focused on issues at home. Her husband, she said, got very ill at one point and had to have brain surgery. But when the sole practitioner turned her attention back to her work after that, she realized she had gotten seriously off track.

Asbury said that initially, she didn't understand that her law office was doing anything wrong. And when she came to her senses and realized otherwise, she did her best to make everything right. In a single day in 2007, she closed her law office. Then, with the help of a lawyer, she voluntarily cooperated with the feds and turned over her files. Her current work, helping homeowners deal with foreclosure fraud, is also an effort to make amends.

“I've tried to do the right thing. ... I have cooperated with them, and I regret the decisions, and I wish that I had never stepped into this area," she said. "But it did. It happened. Unfortunately.”

Quote 0 0

Here is a very small sampling of SPAM posts by Anh = Ann = Unregistered SPAM bit©h advocating the scam web site 4closurefraud web site sponsored by criminal Carol Asbury:


Ann (Anh) at 04/20/12 at 05:14 PM within thread "The Judicial Foreclosure Process":


Ann (Anh) at 03/05/12 at 06:35 PM within thread "Announcement - Free April Charney Foreclosure Workshop in Tampa Saturday March 10th 2012":


Ann (Anh) at 02/17/12 at 09:45 PM within thread "Occupy Palm Beach Holding Teach-Ins on Fraudclosures":


"Thousands of homeowners throughout Palm Beach County, and many more throughout the country, are being foreclosed on, even evicted, often through the greed and fraud of the big banks, law firms and mortgage companies that crashed our nation's economy in 2008. But the 99% are fighting back. Local foreclosure fraud activist Lisa Epstein & Fraud Expert Attorney Lynn Szymoniak will explain how, and show us ways to get involved in direct actions to oppose the destructive 1%. For more on Occupy Palm Beach County, go to For more on foreclosure in Palm Beach County and elsewhere, go to and"


Anh is committed to the destruction of the MSFraud website so that the sleezy lawyers and swindlers she promotes can dominate the foreclosure defense web space.  Anh will stop at nothing to ruin the Forum and to push traffic sites operated by sleezy lawyers like Carol Asbury.

Quote 0 0

More of Anh's SPAM on behalf of the criminal enterprise operated by corrupt Florida attorneys:


Ann (Anh) at 01/27/12 at 08:43 PM within thread "CITIZENS RALLY IN TALLAHASSEE AGAINST FORECLOSURE FRAUD, FEBRUARY 16, 2012": 




Mortgage Justice Group, ForeclosureHamlet and 4closurefraud join Awake the State, the Coalition of Occupy Foreclosure Working Groups movement, and other groups across the nation to rally at the capital in Tallahassee for the annual FORECLOSURE AWARENESS DAY RALLY on Feb. 16, 2012. The rally is to bring awareness about illegal foreclosures and to stop the Florida legislature from making Florida a non-judicial state, thus denying citizens “due process” in court."


Ann(Anh) at 08/05/11 at 11:53 AM within thread "More than 6,000 Fellow Floridians Sign Petition to the Inspector General to Investigate Attorney General Bondi’s Firings of June Clarkson and Theresa"


"More than 6,000 Fellow Floridians Sign Petition to the Inspector General to Investigate Attorney General Bondi’s Firings of June Clarkson and Theresa Edwards

Quote 0 0

Unregistered wrote:
I have no connection with Carol Ashbury or I don't work for any lawyer. 
Some people on this site do not want readers to know  foreclosure defense news, Appeal Court winning case opinions, how to fight foreclosure, good pleading samples. Wonder why ?

If you are not connected to them - then STOP promoting felons and their businesses.
Carol Asbury IS  fraud and a felon
Carol Asbury's newly renamed law firm - located at the same address is a FRAUD  IS A FRAUD AND an attempt by Carol to show how she cares about the everyday innocent people

Quote 0 0


You don't understand. The rally in Talahassee in March was to protest the Banker's Foreclosure Act. This Act if it was voted, it would turn Florida into non judicial foreclosure state which mean Bank can foreclose without going to Court. Thousands of people in foreclosure would be denied their Due of Process Right.

The Fraud foreclosure Act was not voted this year. Thanks God.


 Read, read, read and be informed before critize other people.





Quote 0 0


You don't understand. The rally in Talahassee in March was to protest the Banker's Foreclosure Act. This Act if it was voted, it would turn Florida into non judicial foreclosure state which mean Bank can foreclose without going to Court. Thousands of people in foreclosure would be denied their Due of Process Right.

The Fraud foreclosure Act was not voted this year. Thanks God.

Read, read, read and be informed before critize other people.


Anh, I understand perfectly.  You are a vile and dispicable SPAMMER who uses the pretext of pretending to help people to engage in SPAM on behalf of a number of criminal enterprises.  The persistence of your SPAM efforts after repeated protests and warnings exposes you as a person who is engaged in the purposeful promotion of fraudulent enterprises and scams, thereby making you an accessory and/or co-conspirator.


When one is engaged in the promotion of fraudulent activities, one can also be charged with the crime.  You seem to fail to appreciate just how far along criminal investigations into your sponsors have reached.  Your name has come to the attention of those investigating these crimes.  Hopefully, you will be personally named in the next round of indictments.


Claudia is but one of the many victims who has suffered because of the fraud perpetrated by those you celebrate.  Free speech has its limits, as when the speech involves actual criminal conduct and activity.  Florida may be very slow to bring attorneys to justice.  The Feds are now acting more quickly.


I understand that you sought to have a former law enforcement official intercede on your behalf and to interfere in a criminal investigation.  That may be a crime all by itself.  The law is closing in on you Anh!  You have nowhere to hide! 

Quote 0 0
Write a reply...