Posts Tagged ‘mortgage fraud’

I think I’m ready to take on the Bank again since their “Administrative Foreclosure” last year. I feel confident due to the additional information provided in this article.  I already have accused JP MORGAN/CHASE in writing of fraud, corruption, and deception, and now we have cover-up of public records during the Title Search procedure and I believe we also have a DUMMY CORPORATION out of CALIFORNIA  which I believe was actually created and owned by JP MORGAN/CHASE.  It may take a few days to pull my papers together and do the research. All I can say is: “I Am ready to do this NOW.”  Send some good energy my way so every One can be exposed to the light that I getting ready to shine into a very dark situation.

If you are new to the mortgage fraud perpetrated by the PRIVATE CORPARATIONS called the FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM in cooperation with the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC. and need more information, I’d recommend reading the article listed below xxfirst:

You Think You Own Your Home, But Your Mortgage Could Be Compromised

By Robert Smith | Red Pill Reports

http://redpillreports.com/red-pill-reports/you-think-you-own-your-home-but-your-mortgage-could-be-compromised/

Thanks
Angel Lucci


Posted from:

RedPill Report

http://redpillreports.com/housing-news/learn-if-your-mortgage-is-compromised/


Learn If Your Mortgage Is Compromised

How To Determine If Your Mortgage Is Compromised

The following Checklist is intended to assist you in making an initial determination as to whether or not your mortgage has been controlled, manipulated, compromised or destroyed.

If you are like me and millions of other Americans, you (1) have been made an involuntarily indentured servant (2) are a serf on what you think is your property (3) are a renter and not a purchaser and (4) will never be able to legally and securely own your home with a clear and legally perfectible Deed after you have made the last mortgage payment on what you THINK is the debt you owe on your Promissory Note.

Learn If Your Mortgage Is Compromised

This condition exists because your property’s Chain of Title is likely Broken and you, many years from now when you ultimately realize you have a serious problem, will be unable legally or otherwise, to obtain the documents required to attempt to perfect your position in the property from the True Lender and Mortgagee because that entity will likely have long since been declared “dead” by a Federal Bankruptcy Court as is currently taking place in the RESCAP Bankruptcy being adjudicated in the U. S. Federal Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York.

This initial review is just that, Initial. However, it is highly indicative that you may be the unknowing victim of illegal activity and fraud that has taken place during the course of your home ownership which likely began at, or prior to, loan closing.

It has been shown that this initial review has been very accurately indicative in pinpointing broken Chains of Title in thousands of individual mortgages and has been continually corroborated by the complete analyses of many individual’s mortgage documents after having undergone subsequent in-depth reviews.

keith-tucker-cartoon-banksters

This initial review must be accomplished by all mortgage holding homeowners as this is the first step and cannot be circumvented. Once the initial result is determined, the next required step is to do an in-depth analysis of all mortgage documents in your possession to investigate and identify many other areas that are likely to further pinpoint and corroborate issues of illegality and fraud of which you likely are a victim.

This process is not fun, however, it is educational and gratifying to be able to identify, with specificity, the true nature and scope of your problem.

As you go through this process, document your results for future reference as accurately and completely as possible.

Once you get started and decide to become involved with our effort described on the website, we will provide for your use and benefit many forms, procedures and processes developed and used in my own six (6) year effort, to help you minimize effort and stress and to assist you in organizing the documents that, at first, seem insurmountably massive and uncontrollable.

Take solace in the fact that you are doing what many will not do for their own benefit. You are taking positive steps to become educated and informed.

Getting Prepared

Sit at your internet-connected computer with your Mortgage or Deed of Trust (depending on how the document is termed in your State).

Have pen and paper available to write down your notes and thoughts as you go through the process.

Write down everything you think of. Don’t overlook or neglect anything. Your thoughts, ideas and memories of your mortgage transaction are very important.

During the process, you will be instructed to refer to two (2) separate MERS Member OrgID listings. The OrgID is thoroughly described below.

This is one of the most important steps in the process, so pay close attention to detail.

The most complete listing of all MERS Member OrgID’s we have ever been able to acquire is the 2009 listing that was privately posted on the MERS website for a short period after the bubble burst in late 2008. We obtained this listing prior to MERS removing it from their website. To access this list, Click Here: http://mortgageendgame.com/MERSmemberNum.php

To insure you accomplish as thorough a review as possible, you will also need to review the currently re-posted listing of all MERS Member OrgID’s once again shown on the MERS website. To access this list, Click Here: http://mersinc.org/about-us/member-search

Let’s Get Started

1. Refer to your Mortgage or Deed of Trust.

2. “MERS” refers to “Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.”

3. “MIN” refers to “MERS Identification Number.”

This number is of the utmost import and is the controlling number for your Mortgage or Deed of Trust and Promissory Note from the date of closing through the expiration of the loan term. There is no more important factual indicator that your Mortgage or Deed of Trust has been compromised.

4. Look for a MIN on the first page of your Mortgage or Deed of Trust. This is an eighteen (18) digit number and is styled MIN XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX.

Digits 1 thru 7 identify the OrgID of the lender registered with MERS as a MERS Member. These seven (7) digits are referred to as the MERS Member OrgID.

Digits 8 thru 17 identify your loan contract number.

Digit 18 is a single check digit. You need not be concerned with this check digit at this point. It may
come into play upon further review and analysis.
5. The first section of the Mortgage or Deed of Trust is the Definitions section. Locate the Paragraph that
discusses the definition of Lender.

6. If your Mortgage or Deed of Trust is a MERS Mortgage, there will be a definition either immediately before or after the definition of Lender which gives a definition for MERS. The definition generally begins with the statement MERS is Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.

7. Refer to digits 1 thru 7 in the MIN Number. Now refer to the two (2) lists of MERS Members and their OrgID’s as discussed above.

You are looking to determine if the name of the mortgage company you think you have dealt with is listed as a MERS Member on either of the two (2) lists and additionally, if the first seven (7) digits in the MIN Number shown on your Mortgage or Deed of Trust match the seven (7) digit MERS Member OrgID shown on either of the two (2) lists.

In many instances, these numbers do not match. This means that the mortgage company you think you borrowed the money from was not the true lender and was simply sitting at the closing table as a Table Funder. This is a MAJOR PROBLEM.

8. Check the section in Definitions that explains the Note. In most cases, the loan number for the Promissory Note will be listed in this section. If the loan contract number is not the same as digits 8 through 17 in the MIN Number, your mortgage has been compromised and likely was sold Prior To filing with the County Recorder’s Office.

9. If your loan contract number begins with one or more zeros (0’s), there likely is a major problem.

10. If, on the first page or so of your Mortgage or Deed of Trust is the statement “(Your State Name) – Single – Family – Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac” this means that both your Mortgage or Deed of Trust and Promissory Note have been prepared in accordance with guidelines specified by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to streamline the securitization and sale of the Promissory Note by turning your Promissory Note into Bearer Paper.

11. If the phrase Uniform Instrument With MERS or MERS Modified Form follows the statement in #10 above, the Mortgage or Deed of Trust and Promissory Note have been prepared in accordance with guidelines specifically dictated for MERS by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac to facilitate the securitization and sale of the Promissory Note as Bearer Paper.

12. Next, go to the MERS website at https://www.mers-servicerid.org/sis/index.jsp to see if the Mortgage or Deed of Trust is a MERS Mortgage. MERS Members have the option internally to purchase Non- MERS Promissory Notes and integrate them into the MERS System without you knowing this is being done.
13. Type in the CAPTCHA code on the screen to gain entry. The letters are case sensitive.

14. Single left click on the logon button.

15. On the next screen, single left click on the radio button to the left of the phrase Search Property Address/Borrower Details.

16. Next, single left click on the radio button to the left of the phrase Borrower Name, SSN and Property Zip Code.

17. Next, single left click on the radio button to the left of the phrase Search by Individual Borrower, SSN and Property Zip Code.

18. In the form box that appears, enter the first and last name of the primary borrower, his or her Social Security Number and the property Zip Code.

19. Next, single left click on the Search button.

20. After receiving the search results, read the screen carefully and either print this Page or make a screen shot of it. It should tell you how to identify the current investor.

21. There is an extraordinarily high percentage of mistakes on the MERS Database, so this information must be further corroborated to assure the highest degree of probability as to its accuracy.

22. Next, look at your Monthly Mortgage Billing Statement.

23. If your account number is a ten (10) digit number, you may be a MERS Controlled Customer.

24. If your account number is a ten (10) digit number with one (1) or more leading digits being zeros (0’s), you are either a MERS Controlled Customer or are highly likely the victim of an in-house securitization and sale by your mortgage servicer.

25. Next, refer to your cancelled checks used to make your monthly mortgage payments.

26. If the name of the business to which you have been paying your monthly mortgage bills changes from one name to another, your Mortgage or Deed of Trust has been securitized and sold unless the change can be verified as having been due to a corporate merger.

27. Review the front and back of all your mortgage payment checks to identify the ABA Routing Number, the Account Number and/or the ACH Routing/Transit Number of the account depositing your payments.

28. If any of these three (3) numbers periodically change, you are a victim of securitization and your property’s Chain of Title is likely destroyed. This destruction means you will not own your home after you make your last mortgage payment. All monies invested in the property have been rent payments and NOT purchase payments used to develop equity in the property.

Conclusions and Thoughts

Bank of America, Wells Fargo, Citibank, JP Morgan Chase and many other lenders are Shareholders in MERSCORP, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiary, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS).

Important: These Shareholders control the Boards of Directors of both MERSCORP, Inc. and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) and are the very same Shareholders who initially funded and formed these two organizations for the purpose of administratively providing the Shareholders with the privately owned and controlled ability to secretly carry out the massive fraudulent securitization programs that have destroyed the Chains of Title and subsequently the values of millions of residential mortgages.

These entities, in some cases, have separate internal residential mortgage securitization divisions which do not deal directly with MERS. As with MERS, these securitization divisions keep their activities privately internalized.

These entities have proven to be especially adept at circumventing the legal requirements of making statutorily required filings at the County Recorder’s Office.

Failing to accomplish these filings have Broken the Chains of Title on millions of residential mortgages.

Although being the most numerically predominant participant, MERS is not the only entity securitizing and selling Promissory Notes and Breaking Chains of Title.

Although unlikely to be the case, even if it is determined that MERS is not obviously involved in your mortgage, you are not free of risk as many mortgages were privately, without the knowledge of the homeowner, moved into the totally destructive MERS System, AFTER your loan closing had taken place. If this proves to be the situation, we will lead you through an in-depth analysis once you have become involved with our effort.

For a thorough explanation of how the MERS’ operation may have affected you and your family, download and review Sections 18 thru 18-15 in my Whistleblower Jurat Affidavit located in the Documents For Download section at Save Our Family and Home.com.

After Completing The Checklist

Continue reading at the bottom of this Blog and jump to the next part of this procedure.

http://redpillreports.com/housing-news/learn-if-your-mortgage-is-compromised/

 

Posted from:

Image

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/l-randall-wray/new-yorks-us-bankruptcy-c_b_824167.html

United States Bankruptcy Judge Robert Grossman has ruled that MERS’s business practices are unlawful. He explicitly acknowledged that this ruling sets a precedent that has far-reaching implications for half of the mortgages in this country. MERS is dead. The banks are in big trouble. And all foreclosures should be stopped immediately while the legislative branch comes up with a solution.

For some weeks I have been arguing that MERS is perpetrating foreclosure fraud all across the nation. Its business model makes it impossible to legally foreclose on any mortgaged property registered within its system — which includes half of the outstanding mortgages in the US. MERS was a fraud from day one, whose purpose was to evade property recording fees and to subvert five centuries of property law. Its chickens have come home to roost.

Wall Street wanted to transform America’s housing sector into the world’s biggest casino and needed to undermine property rights to make it easier to run the scam. The payoffs were bigger for lenders who could induce homeowners to take mortgages they could not possibly afford. The mortgages were packaged into securities sold-on to patsy investors who were defrauded by the “reps and warranties” falsely certifying the securities as backed by top grade loans. In fact the securities were not backed by mortgages, and in any case the mortgages were sure to go bad. Given that homeowners would default, the Wall Street banks that serviced the mortgages needed a foreclosure steamroller to quickly and cheaply throw families out of the homes so that they could be resold to serve as purported collateral for yet more gambling bets. MERS — the industry’s creation — stepped up to the plate to facilitate the fraud. The judge has ruled that its practices are illegal. MERS and the banks lose; investors and homeowners win.

Here’s MERS’s business model in brief. Real estate property sales and mortgages are supposed to be recorded in local recording offices, with fees paid. With the rise of securitization, each mortgage might be sold a dozen times before it came to rest as the collateral behind a mortgage backed security (MBS), and each of those sales would need to be recorded. MERS was created to bypass public recording; it would be listed in the county records as the “mortgagee of record” and the “nominee” of the holder of mortgage. Members of MERS could then transfer the mortgage from one to another without all the trouble of changing the local records, simply by (voluntarily) recording transactions on MERS’s registry.

A mortgage has two parts, the “note” and the “security” (not to be confused with the MBS) or “deed of trust” that is usually just called the “mortgage”. The idea behind MERS was that the “note” would be transferred from seller to purchaser, but the “mortgage” would be held by MERS. In fact, MERS recommended that the “note” be held by the mortgage servicer to facilitate foreclosures, but in practice it seems that the notes were often lost or destroyed (which is why all those Burger King Kids were hired to Robo-sign “lost note affidavits”).

At each transfer, the note and mortgage are supposed to be “assigned” to the new owner; MERS claimed that because it was the “mortgagee of record” and the “nominee” of both parties to every transaction, there was no need to assign the “mortgage” until foreclosure. And it argued that since the old adage is that the “mortgage follows the note” and that both parties intended to assign the notes (even if they did not get around to doing it), then the Bankruptcy Court should rule that the assignments did take place in some sort of “virtual reality” so that there is a clear chain of title that allows the servicers to foreclose.

The Judge rejected every aspect of MERS’s argument. The Court rejected the claim that MERS could be both holder of the mortgage as well as nominee of the “true” owner. It also found that “mortgagee of record” is a vague term that does not give one legal standing as mortgagee. Hence, at best, MERS is only a nominee. It rejected MERS’s claim that as nominee it can assign notes or mortgages — a nominee has limited rights and those most certainly do not include the right to transfer ownership unless there is specific written instruction to do so. In scarcely veiled anger, the Judge wrote:

“According to MERS, the principal/agent relationship among itself and its members is created by the MERS rules of membership and terms and conditions, as well as the Mortgage itself. However, none of the documents expressly creates an agency relationship or even mentions the word “agency.” MERS would have this Court cobble together the documents and draw inferences from the words contained in those documents.”

Judge Grossman rejected MERS’s arguments, saying that mere membership in MERS does not provide “agency” rights to MERS, and agreeing with the Supreme Court of Kansas that ruled “The parties appear to have defined the word [nominee] in much the same way that the blind men of Indian legend described an elephant — their description depended on which part they were touching at any given time.”

He went on to disparage MERS’s claim that since in legal theory the “mortgage follows the note”, the Court should overlook the fact that MERS separated them. He stopped just short of saying that by separating them, MERS has irretrievably destroyed the clear chain of title, although he hinted that a future ruling could come to that conclusion:

“MERS argues that notes and mortgages processed through the MERS System are never “separated” because beneficial ownership of the notes and mortgages are always held by the same entity. The Court will not address that issue in this Decision, but leaves open the issue as to whether mortgages processed through the MERS system are properly perfected and valid liens. See Carpenter v. Longan, 83 U.S. at 274 (finding that an assignment of the mortgage without the note is a nullity); Landmark Nat’l Bank v. Kesler, 216 P.3d 158, 166-67 (Kan. 2009) (“[I]n the event that a mortgage loan somehow separates interests of the note and the deed of trust, with the deed of trust lying with some independent entity, the mortgage may become unenforceable”).”

That would mean not only the end of MERS, but also the end of the banks holding unenforceable mortgages because they were not, and cannot be, “perfected”. MERS and the banks screwed up big time, and there is no “do over” — there is no valid lien on the property, so owners have got their homes free and clear.

There have been numerous court rulings against MERS — including decisions made by state supreme courts. What is significant about the US Bankruptcy Court of New York’s ruling is that the judge specifically set out to examine the legality of MERS’s business model. As the judge argued in the decision, “The Court believes this analysis is necessary for the precedential effect it will have on other cases pending before this Court”. In the scathing opinion, Judge Grossman variously labeled MERS’s positions as “stunningly inconsistent” with the facts, “absurd, at best”, and “not supported by the law”. The ruling is a complete repudiation of every argument MERS has made about the legality of its procedures.

What is particularly ironic is that MERS actually forced the judge to undertake the examination of its business model. The case before the judge involved a foreclosed homeowner who had already lost in state court. The homeowner then approached the US Bankruptcy Court to argue that the foreclosing bank did not have legal standing because of MERS’s business practices. However, by the “Rooker-Feldman” doctrine (or res judicata), the US Bankruptcy Court is prohibited from “looking behind” the state court’s decision to determine the issue of legal standing. Hence, Judge Grossman ruled in the bank’s favor on that particular issue.

Yet, MERS’s high priced lawyers wanted to push the issue and asked for the Judge to rule in favor of MERS’s practices, too. So while MERS won the little battle over one foreclosed home, it lost the war against the nation’s homeowners. The Judge ruled against MERS on every single issue of importance. And it was MERS’s stupid arrogance that brought it down.

As I predicted two weeks ago, MERS would be dead within weeks. Judge Grossman has driven the final stake through its black heart. The half of America’s homeowners whose mortgages are registered at MERS have been handed a “get out of jail free” card. Wall Street has no right to foreclose on their property. The tide has turned. It won’t be easy, but homeowners in those states with judicial foreclosures now have Judge Grossman on their side. Those in the other states (just over half) will have a tougher time because they can lose their home before they ever get to court. But the law is still on their side — foreclosure by members of MERS is theft — so class action lawsuits may be the way to go.

MERS is dead, but can the banks survive? There are two separate issues. First, there are the “reps and warranties” given by the mortgage securitizers (Wall Street investment banks) to the investors (pension funds, GSEs, PIMCO, and so on). We now know that a quarter to a third of the mortgages bundled to serve as backing for the securities did not meet stated quality. Worse, we also know that the banks knew this — they hired third parties to undertake “due diligence” to check quality. This was not done to protect the investors, rather, the purpose was to strengthen the bargaining position of the securitizers, who were able to reduce the prices paid for the mortgages. Now, the investors are suing the banks for restitution–forcing them to cover the losses and buy-back the bad mortgages at original price. To add insult to injury, even the NYFed is suing them. That is a lot like having your parents sue you for their inadequate parental oversight of your behavior.

The second issue is that the mortgages backing the securities were supposed to be placed in Trusts (affiliates of the securitizing banks), with the Trustee certifying not only that the mortgages met the reps and warranties but also that the documents were up to snuff and safely locked away. We know they were not. As mentioned above, MERS told the servicers to hold the notes, and many or most of them were destroyed or lost. Further, the notes were separated from the mortgages — making them null and void. In any case, they are not at the Trusts. This means the MBSs are not backed by mortgages, meaning the MBSs are unsecured debt. MERS’s business model ensures that. So, again, the banks must take back the fraudulent securities — paying off the investors.

What can Wall Street do? Well, I suppose the “help wanted” signs are already up at MERS and Wall Street banks: “Needed: Burger King Kids to Robo-sign forged quasi-professional-looking docs”. The problem is that even with tens of thousands of Robo-Kids, Wall Street will not be able to pull off a vast criminal conspiracy on the necessary scale. Think about it: 60 million mortgages, each sold ten times, means 600 million transactions and assignments that have to be forged. MERS’s documentation was notoriously sloppy, relying on voluntary recording by members. The Robo-Kids would have to go back through a decade of records to manufacture a paper trail that would convince now-skeptical judges that there is a clear chain of title from the first recording in the public record through to the foreclosure. It ain’t going to happen.

The only other hope is that Wall Street can call in its campaign contribution chips and get Congress to retroactively legalize fraud. That is what they do in those dictatorships that protestors are now bringing down in the Middle East. Is Washington willing to take that risk, just to please its Wall Street benefactors?

The court document is available here. It is terrific reading.

This post originally appeared at Benzinga.

——————————————-

Image

Several Big Banks Forge Mortgage Documents, New Unsealed Documents Show

Posted on August 21, 2013
by Joshua De Leon •

http://www.ringoffireradio.com/2013/08/several-big-banks-forge-mortgage-documents-new-unsealed-documents-show/

Last year, some Wall Street banks settled in a fraud lawsuit for $95 million, filed by Florida resident and white-collar fraud specialist, Lynn Szymoniak. The lawsuit named 28 “banks, mortgage servicers and document processing companies,” and was filed in federal courts in North and South Carolina.

The scam consisted of the banks drawing up fake mortgage documents “because they could not legally establish true ownership of the loans when trying to foreclose.”

The lawsuit, recently unsealed, exposes some nasty secrets about the way in which banks handled the lawsuit and what that handling means. David Dayen with Salon, reported because the banks settled, rather than fought the suit, there are “tens of millions of mortgages in America [that] still lack a legitimate chain of ownership.” These tens of millions have been estimated to equal up to trillions of dollars. And because the mortgage documents are forgeries, there is no “underlying owner” that can rightfully foreclose on these mortgages.

What the banks were doing is sending off securities that were not mortgage-backed. They were essentially empty securities. As Syzmoniak points out, the “Defendants used fraudulent mortgage assignments to conceal that over 1400 MBS trusts, . . are missing critical documents.” The banks would push out these non-mortgage backed securities and eventually created over $1.4 trillion of worthless mortgages and securities.

A crucial piece of evidence in the lawsuit was that, in 2009, one “Assignment of Mortgage was inadvertently not recorded prior to the Final Judgement of Foreclosure.” This makes the underlying ownership of the mortgage invalid because that finding proved that the “mortgage assignment was not made before the closing date of the trust.”

Because these documents were faked, mortgages “were materially harmed by the subsequent impaired value of the securities.” The banks committed fraud to the most severe degree. They created $1.4 trillion in non-mortgage-backed securities, but they were able to settle by only paying a fraction of the amount they defrauded. And they even lied to the Securities and Exchange Commission about the valuelessness of the mortgages. No one was put in handcuffs, no one was convicted.

Despite the five largest banks settling, Szymoniak can still bring other banks like HSBC, Bank of New York Mellon, and Deutsche Bank to trial to seek retribution of their crimes.
———————
Josh is a writer and researcher with Ring of Fire. Follow him on Twitter @dnJdeli.

20130822-170322.jpg

Your mortgage documents are fake!
Prepare to be outraged. Newly obtained filings from this Florida woman’s lawsuit uncover horrifying scheme (Update)

BY DAVID DAYEN
Posted from Salon
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/12/your_mortgage_documents_are_fake/

Lynn Szymoniak (Credit: CBS News/60 MInutes

If you know about foreclosure fraud, the mass fabrication of mortgage documents in state courts by banks attempting to foreclose on homeowners, you may have one nagging question: Why did banks have to resort to this illegal scheme? Was it just cheaper to mock up the documents than to provide the real ones? Did banks figure they simply had enough power over regulators, politicians and the courts to get away with it? (They were probably right about that one.)
A newly unsealed lawsuit, which banks settled in 2012 for $95 million, actually offers a different reason, providing a key answer to one of the persistent riddles of the financial crisis and its aftermath. The lawsuit states that banks resorted to fake documents because they could not legally establish true ownership of the loans when trying to foreclose.

This reality, which banks did not contest but instead settled out of court, means that tens of millions of mortgages in America still lack a legitimate chain of ownership, with implications far into the future. And if Congress, supported by the Obama administration, goes back to the same housing finance system, with the same corrupt private entities who broke the nation’s private property system back in business packaging mortgages, then shame on all of us.

The 2011 lawsuit was filed in U.S. District Court in both North and South Carolina, by a white-collar fraud specialist named Lynn Szymoniak, on behalf of the federal government, 17 states and three cities. Twenty-eight banks, mortgage servicers and document processing companies are named in the lawsuit, including mega-banks like JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Citi and Bank of America.
Szymoniak, who fell into foreclosure herself in 2009, researched her own mortgage documents and found massive fraud (for example, one document claimed that Deutsche Bank, listed as the owner of her mortgage, acquired ownership in October 2008, four months after they first filed for foreclosure). She eventually examined tens of thousands of documents, enough to piece together the entire scheme.

A mortgage has two parts: the promissory note (the IOU from the borrower to the lender) and the mortgage, which creates the lien on the home in case of default. During the housing bubble, banks bought loans from originators, and then (in a process known as securitization) enacted a series of transactions that would eventually pool thousands of mortgages into bonds, sold all over the world to public pension funds, state and municipal governments and other investors. A trustee would pool the loans and sell the securities to investors, and the investors would get an annual percentage yield on their money.

In order for the securitization to work, banks purchasing the mortgages had to physically convey the promissory note and the mortgage into the trust. The note had to be endorsed (the way an individual would endorse a check), and handed over to a document custodian for the trust, with a “mortgage assignment” confirming the transfer of ownership. And this had to be done before a 90-day cutoff date, with no grace period beyond that.

Georgetown Law professor Adam Levitin spelled this out in testimony before Congress in 2010: “If mortgages were not properly transferred in the securitization process, then mortgage-backed securities would in fact not be backed by any mortgages whatsoever.”
The lawsuit alleges that these notes, as well as the mortgage assignments, were “never delivered to the mortgage-backed securities trusts,” and that the trustees lied to the SEC and investors about this. As a result, the trusts could not establish ownership of the loan when they went to foreclose, forcing the production of a stream of false documents, signed by “robo-signers,” employees using a bevy of corporate titles for companies that never employed them, to sign documents about which they had little or no knowledge.

Many documents were forged (the suit provides evidence of the signature of one robo-signer, Linda Green, written eight different ways), some were signed by “officers” of companies that went bankrupt years earlier, and dozens of assignments listed as the owner of the loan “Bogus Assignee for Intervening Assignments,” clearly a template that was never changed. One defendant in the case, Lender Processing Services, created masses of false documents on behalf of the banks, often using fake corporate officer titles and forged signatures. This was all done to establish standing to foreclose in courts, which the banks otherwise could not.

Szymoniak stated in her lawsuit that, “Defendants used fraudulent mortgage assignments to conceal that over 1400 MBS trusts, each with mortgages valued at over $1 billion, are missing critical documents,” meaning that at least $1.4 trillion in mortgage-backed securities are, in fact, non-mortgage-backed securities. Because of the strict laws governing of these kinds of securitizations, there’s no way to make the assignments after the fact. Activists have a name for this: “securitization FAIL.”

One smoking gun piece of evidence in the lawsuit concerns a mortgage assignment dated Feb. 9, 2009, after the foreclosure of the mortgage in question was completed. According to the suit, “A typewritten note on the right hand side of the document states: ‘This Assignment of Mortgage was inadvertently not recorded prior to the Final Judgment of Foreclosure… but is now being recorded to clear title.’”
This admission confirms that the mortgage assignment was not made before the closing date of the trust, invalidating ownership. The suit further argued that “the act of fabricating the assignments is evidence that the MBS Trust did not own the notes and/or the mortgage liens for some assets claimed to be in the pool.”

The federal government, states and cities joined the lawsuit under 25 counts of the federal False Claims Act and state-based versions of the law. All of them bought mortgage-backed securities from banks that never conveyed the mortgages or notes to the trusts. The plaintiffs argued that, considering that trustees and servicers had to spend lots of money forging and fabricating documents to establish ownership, they were materially harmed by the subsequent impaired value of the securities. Also, these investors (which includes the Treasury Department and the Federal Reserve) paid for the transfer of mortgages to the trusts, yet they were never actually transferred.

Finally, the lawsuit argues that the federal government was harmed by “payments made on mortgage guarantees to Defendants lacking valid notes and assignments of mortgages who were not entitled to demand or receive said payments.”

Despite Szymoniak seeking a trial by jury, the government intervened in the case, and settled part of it at the beginning of 2012, extracting $95 million from the five biggest banks in the suit (Wells Fargo, Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, Citi and GMAC/Ally Bank). Szymoniak herself was awarded $18 million. But the underlying evidence was never revealed until the case was unsealed last Thursday.

Now that it’s unsealed, Szymoniak, as the named plaintiff, can go forward and prove the case. Along with her legal team (which includes the law firm of Grant & Eisenhoffer, which has recovered more money under the False Claims Act than any firm in the country), Szymoniak can pursue discovery and go to trial against the rest of the named defendants, including HSBC, the Bank of New York Mellon, Deutsche Bank and US Bank.

The expenses of the case, previously borne by the government, now are borne by Szymoniak and her team, but the percentages of recovery funds are also higher. “I’m really glad I was part of collecting this money for the government, and I’m looking forward to going through discovery and collecting the rest of it,” Szymoniak told Salon.
It’s good that the case remains active, because the $95 million settlement was a pittance compared to the enormity of the crime. By the end of 2009, private mortgage-backed securities trusts held one-third of all residential mortgages in the U.S. That means that tens of millions of home mortgages worth trillions of dollars have no legitimate underlying owner that can establish the right to foreclose. This hasn’t stopped banks from foreclosing anyway with false documents, and they are often successful, a testament to the breakdown of law in the judicial system. But to this day, the resulting chaos in disentangling ownership harms homeowners trying to sell these properties, as well as those trying to purchase them. And it renders some properties impossible to sell.

To this day, banks foreclose on borrowers using fraudulent mortgage assignments, a legacy of failing to prosecute this conduct and instead letting banks pay a fine to settle it. This disappoints Szymoniak, who told Salon the owner of these loans is now essentially “whoever lies the most convincingly and whoever gets the benefit of doubt from the judge.”

Szymoniak used her share of the settlement to start the Housing Justice Foundation, a non-profit that attempts to raise awareness of the continuing corruption of the nation’s courts and land title system.

Most of official Washington, including President Obama, wants to wind down mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and return to a system where private lenders create securitization trusts, packaging pools of loans and selling them to investors. Government would provide a limited guarantee to investors against catastrophic losses, but the private banks would make the securities, to generate more capital for home loans and expand homeownership.

That’s despite the evidence we now have that, the last time banks tried this, they ignored the law, failed to convey the mortgages and notes to the trusts, and ripped off investors trying to cover their tracks, to say nothing of how they violated the due process rights of homeowners and stole their homes with fake documents.

The very same banks that created this criminal enterprise and legal quagmire would be in control again. Why should we view this in any way as a sound public policy, instead of a ticking time bomb that could once again throw the private property system, a bulwark of capitalism and indeed civilization itself, into utter disarray? As Lynn Szymoniak puts it, “The President’s calling for private equity to return. Why would we return to this?”

Update: This story previously suggested that banks settled this lawsuit with the federal government for $1 billion. That number is actually the total for a number of whistle-blower lawsuits that were folded into a larger National Mortgage Settlement. This specific lawsuit settled for $95 million. The post above has been changed to reflect this fact.
———-
Posted from Salon
http://www.salon.com/2013/08/12/your_mortgage_documents_are_fake/

Posted from: http://removingtheshackles.blogspot.com/2013/02/wheres-money.html

 removing-the-shackles

This was emailed to me this morning by a friend of mine.  Unfortunately there was no link to the original article nor a date.  If anyone knows this information please let me know so that I can add it to the article here.

…. just a reminder of how unbelievably corrupt the banking system really is.   Not that you guys need that reminder, but I thought it might be a great piece of the puzzle to give to those people who do not yet understand the corruption and illegal nature of the Banking mortgage system.

Edited 02/25/2013 10:52am est to add:

original article link: http://nesaranews.blogspot.ca/2013/02/wheres-money.html

Where’s the money?
This question exposes the silly world we live in and how badly we are informed.
The being informed is the core issue and how silly we all are not to think for
ourselves. Trust the media or government actors now have a whole new meaning.
There are approximately 70,000,000 homes in America
let us say that the aggregate average payment would be 2000 per month per home
per mortgage times 70 million homes.
The monthly total is $140 billion per month, Cash Flow.
This works out to 1.68 trillion per year.
The average length of a mortgage is set out in the amortization schedules as 20 years.
20 years times 1.6 8 trillion equals $33.6 trillion dollars.
I repeat $33.6 trillion dollars.
And we bailed out the banks?
Now let us look at the other side.
Where did that $33.6 trillion dollars come from that back the alleged loans to
the homeowners of America?
Good question isn’t it?
Is this 33.6 trillion dollars earned and placed into the money system by the people,
or is it created by the banks?
All of this 33.6 trillion dollars is represented in our homes, a real hard asset, and
we the American homeowner have possession!!!!!   Possession is 9/10 of the law.
Not codified in law or a maxim of law, just an urban legend.
Restated:  In a property dispute (whether real or personal), in the absence of clear and
compelling testimony or documentation to the contrary, the person in actual possession of
the property is presumed to be the rightful owner.  (Check Wikipedia).
And even better is that the titles are in our names in and on the public record as
fee simple ownership in our names.!!!!
The bank system is nothing more than a management system for our labor.
All of our labor is what backs the private money issued by the Federal Reserve,
bank credit.
Simply put we the alleged borrower gave a promissory note to a bank.
The bank exchanged the deed and possession of the house for the promissory note.
A simple exchange, an executed complete contract, paid and complete and closed
by Operation of Law. At that point you have a valid contract with consideration
and exchange of valuable property.
The alleged lender, bank, and its contract contain two parts, the Promissory Note
and the Deed of Trust.  This is a single unit of contract.
The Deed of Trust references the loan received and its note, as a single unit.
When the bank separates its own contracted position splitting the note from the
Deed of Trust, it destroys its own contract.
Thus, Carpenter v. Longan, 83 US 271 controls.  There is no available position
for the bank or those it sold pieced of its contract to, such as securities investors
that could state a claim because there is no valid contract after splitting.
The bank then sells a security, the valuable property we gave the Bank, the
promissory note sold into the open market.  Remember, the law says any note
with a maturation date greater than 9 months is a security instrument.
70% of these securities are guaranteed or backed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac,
or FHA, government-sponsored enterprises.
These GSE’s are now in receivership, insolvent, under Federal Housing Finance
Agency, an alleged conservator over the BAIL OUT.
When the bank sold the promissory note as bundled in a security they were paid.
The questions to all American homeowners are:
“Is the bank paid back at that time, when they received the payment for the security?”
“And, could the bank sell securities that have no value?”
Funny how that pesky promissory note has value to the securities buyers, but not
to the bank at the exchange. HOW DOES THAT WORK???????????
The real party in interest holding the security is the only party that could have
claim against our homes. Why?
Because they are the only ones with value in the transaction along with us.
The banks have no value in the transaction, they are simply a transfer agent
in an exchange.
Remember, under 1933/34/35 U.S. Securities’ law, the issuer of the value, you,
the note and Deed of Trust issuer must be advised that the instruments issued
will be used as securities.  No notice, no value later!
It would appear that after the splitting of the note and Deed of Trust and the
securities’ violations that the Promissory Note and Deed of Trust would revert
to chattel property status.
This means a demand for return might expose “Where’s the Money?”.
Given the statements being true, and I can find no evidence that they are not,
the bank proceeds against the homeowner for payments for 20+ years.
But wait!!!!  It gets even better.
The residential market is apparently only 25% of the total property value market
in America. The other 75% is tied up through commercial property, agriculture,
and raw material properties.
Even grade school math and multiplication will tell you that if we use the same
rate of $2000 a month for all of these properties were looking at over $100 trillion
dollars in value.
Essentially were looking at 130 to 140 trillion dollars in real estate assets.
Where’s the money???????????
Isn’t it held secure in our property that we have title to and possession of.
If the banks cannot identify where the Trillions of dollars came from, for an
alleged loan, funds such as depositors or investors funds, disclose the history
of these funds, and the true ownership, along with a transfer document proving
they release their ownership of their property, the trillions of whatever, then the
banks have no interest in our properties.
Is this so simple that it strikes all of you readers the same way?????
Lets finish up the silliness!!!!
For example, I am your debtor and I owe you one million dollars (FRN’s):
I say I will pay you back in 1 Million seconds and 1 Million seconds = approximately 12 days.
I say I will pay you back in 1 Billion seconds and 1 Billion seconds = approximately 32 years.
I say I will pay you back in 1 Trillion seconds and 1 Trillion seconds = approximately 32,000 years.
This is now, according to bankers and politicians and judges, 130-140 times 32.000 years, so how many years is that? REALLY SILLY ISN’T IT WHEN THE SIMPLE FACTS AND TRUTH ARE TOLD!!
The allegory of seconds is to give you a scope of what a TRILLION IS.  Tryhttp://www.pagetutor.com/trillion/index.html for a clear set of visuals.
Careful, don’t go into shock!
Foreclosure by a Bank or Trustee, or Attorney, or Assign is a Trespass on Title,
invasion of executed contract.
Seems like open theft, Breach of Peace, to me.
This is how simple, on point, direct questions expose the Truth.
Principles first, facts second, law third, and the procedure of a simple
question, “Where is the Money?”
Truth is sometimes stranger than the fictions we live in.
From a reviewing associate:
This added proposal should be passed around for discussion
so we can decide together what to do with it.
Now, here is the question we should all be asking ourselves;
“Do we want to change the debt slavery system to a monetary
system, “a money system”, and get ourselves out from under
their debt-slavery system?
Here is how this can be done in a matter of days.
On July 4th 2013 everyone stop paying all mortgages (residential and commercial), credit card debt and all unsecured loans.
It will only work if a majority of the people and corporations will commit to doing this.
You must get this out to everyone you know between now and July 4th for it to work so we all get out from under the debt slavery system.
We the people have all the power if we choose to use it.