If a bank owns and holds a mortgage and has a right to foreclose, why then are so many banks deeding properties between themselves after the Certificate of Title has been issued? This is a question that everyone should have been asking, but it is particularly important given the OCC Settlement Agreements and the promises by some groups, including ProPublica to monitor cases where the banks did not have the right to foreclose. Forget about all the robo signer stuff, this issue is much easier to document (it’s all right there in the public records for all the world to see, and the magnitude dwarfs everthing else.
Best of all you don’t have to wait around until the (ahem) “independent consultants” hired by the banks discover and disclose those cases where they did not have the right to foreclose…you can start “independently consulting” right from your own computer. Here’s how it goes…..
Log onto any county, take Pinellas County for instance Now, pick a bank, any bank and search for deeds from that bank beginning in say 2009. What you will find is page after page of deeds transferring properties, for no consideration, between all the banks. If the foreclosing bank owned and held the note and had the right to foreclose, we wouldn’t see all these transfers.
I believe the huge numbers of intra-bank deeds is clear evidence that the banks did not have standing, ownership or holder status from the beginning. I believe that in perhaps tens of thousands of cases, the named plaintiff in the lawsuit was nothing more than a fiction, a place keeper, a straw party used to get title. Someone would figure out later who might actually have some right to that mortgage or they will just transfer properties and obligations around among the institutions. After all, no one was looking and no one cares, right?
Why isn’t anyone looking at this?