News, Research & Insights for American Homeowners, Patriots & Constitutional Conservatives
"The advertisers who hung in here are going gangbusters."
Via the Daily Rushbo, the inevitable postscript to last night’s semi-official demise of the Campaign for Perpetual Outrage. Who could have guessed that heavy media coverage of an initiative to get him thrown off the air would make radio listeners even more curious to hear what he’s saying? Shirt-rending indignation at the acts of a [...]
Given what a small part of the web we are, it seemed a little melodramatic for Credit Slips to go dark over the proposed Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and Protect IP Act (PIPA). It did seem appropriate at least to add my own voice to the opposition.
If you are not familiar with these heavy-handed attempts to police intellectual property piracy, plenty of information is available from Wikipedia here (and, yes, that link still works today, January 18). Some of the provisions in these acts could have implications for small sites such as this.
Although the government should stop the theft of intellectual property, these proposed laws go way too far, sacrificing too much freedom in the name of property rights. In particular, it disappoints me that some senators who have been champions of consumer protection have put themselves on the wrong side of this issue. Specifically, Senators Patrick Leahy, Sherrod Brown, Dick Durbin, Charles Schumer, Al Franken, and Sheldon Whitehouse are listed on THOMAS as sponsors or co-sponsors of PIPA (S. 968). It would be great to see these senators lead a retreat from these onerous pieces of legislation.
Those are my personal views as blog administrator. And, that is probably a point we don't emphasize enough on this blog -- everyone is speaking for himself or herself only.
What else could it be?
In a recent lengthy piece in praise of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, The Nation’s Lizzy Ratner selects a series of sympathetic examples to demonstrate the successful way in which SNAP acts as a true social safety net, a source-of-last-resort for the most desperate among us. Food stamps, Ratner tells us, are the saving grace of [...]
Read it yourself, or click PLAY and LET ME READ IT TO YOU…. Bwhahahahaha!
Because that provided such a great deterrent.
How will the Obama administration respond to the Iranian plot to commit acts of terror in the US? Joe Biden said that the consequences will be “serious,” but basically says that the Obama administration doesn’t want to go beyond a few new sanctions “yet.” Instead, Obama wants to “unite the world” in isolating the Iranians, [...]
First let me just say that I am not really picking on Rep. Boehner so much individually, as I am picking on both him and his GOP cohorts, collectively. That is to say that President Obama will be re-elected to a second term in 2012 because… well, because he’ll be running unopposed… essentially.
If you’re someone generally predisposed to vote for the GOP’s candidate, or if you’re just someone who feels major disappointment over what has transpired during Obama’s first term and is therefore ready to jump ship in ‘12, do you not see that as being the case? If not, I would only suggest it’s a case of willful blindness.
Obama will win because the guys on the right side of the aisle are no longer a “political party,” in fact, they’re barely an “informal get together.” The GOP has degenerated into a divided-you-fall group of confused ideologues, unsure of the difference between right and politically expedience. In plainer terms, you guys on the right are a mess… an embarrassing mess.
Anyone who reads me regularly knows that I have been no fan of the Democrats or the Obama Administration’s attitude, acts or attempts at solving our nation’s significant economic issues. As administrations go, Obama’s has been anything but transparent, and that alone is offensive enough, but his decision to flat out ignore the housing and mortgage crisis has placed this country in real economic danger going forward, and that is, in my mind unforgivable.
And yet, here I sit, prepared to ignore the upcoming political season, at least as far as the contest for president is concerned, because there’s nothing to be gained one way or the other by attending to it. Unless Obama is caught on video wearing his own “blue dress,” he’s our prez for another four.
The Debt Ceiling Debacle…
Watching the debate over the debt ceiling was emblematic of the situation we face. The whole thing was maddening, there’s no question about that, theater… yes… but beyond that… well, it was stupid. I mean, if Goldman Sachs and Bank of America were “too big to fail” in ’08, then why wouldn’t the United States in its entirety fall under the same sort of policy in 2011? Our banks are too big to be allowed to fail, but our nation’s treasury… nah, let it default?
Oh, come on… just stop it right now.
Speaker Boehner, telling Congress and the American people that he had worked his way into the top spot in the House in order to do more than just go to fancy meals and play golf, leapt into action. I don’t know what it looked like to you, but to me it appeared that he contacted the White House and asked for a tee time. Next thing I knew, Mr. Speaker and the Prez were out on the links hammering out a bi-partisan save-the-world type of deal.
And they did… for a few hours, anyway. According to Carl Hulse writing for The New York Times in July, the deal they fleetingly struck was “transformational,” and I think it’s safe to say that right about now, “transformational” would be a good thing. Obama and Boehner’s compromise would have cut our government’s spending by up to $4 trillion over the next 10 years, made significant changes to the tax code, and taken steps toward the shoring up of Medicare and Social Security.
Of course, that “bi-partisan compromise” came apart at the seams one Saturday night when Speaker Boehner, citing the White House’s insistence on tax increases, walked away from the deal. Listening to him explain why he was backing out, I could have sworn that I heard beeping in the background. Clearly, the Republicans in the House are never going to be okay with allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire, and it doesn’t matter what that means to the nation in other areas.
The tax cuts I’m referring to should be seen as a relatively minor issue… allowing the top bracket to return to paying roughly 39% instead of 35%, as they did during the Clinton administration would hardly signal the end of the world as we know it… and there’s no question as to whether the rich, and by “rich” I do mean the top 1 percent… have disproportionately benefited from their largesse. But, to the GOP’s leaders, allowing the Bush tax cuts to expire would drive a stake through the heart of the economic recovery that’s not occurring by not allowing them to expire.
If the whole thing makes no sense to you, that’s only because it makes no sense… period.
The GOP likes to refer to those that benefit most from the tax cuts as “job creators,” which when you look at the unemployment numbers over the last four years plus, is just laughable. But yet, Speaker Boehner was quite clearly told over that weekend by others in his “party” that he would not be supported as long as the Bush tax cuts were expendable.
Clearly… and incredibly… the GOP would rather see anything else get cut, including Medicare. And on the other side of the aisle, the Democrats would rather see the tax cuts expire than anything else. It’s very much as if the unstoppable force has met the immovable object… and we… you and I… are paying the price as our nation continues to circle the drain in a race to the bottom.
Republicans viewed Speaker Boehner’s ideas as a harbinger for political disaster. First and foremost, they saw the deal as having the potential to hand the Democrats what could be seen as a major victory by extending the Bush tax cuts ONLY for the middle class. That horrific reality, they believe, would end up costing House Republicans the majority in 2012 by throwing out the tax breaks for the wealthiest Americans. And to that I can only say, shut up, shut up, shut up.
Look, I’ve been an “employer” for some 20 years, and I’d just like to assure everyone that breaking the collective back of our nation’s middle class is precisely what is stopping America’s employers from spending the massive amounts of cash in their coffers on plans to expand and grow. I don’t care what you do about corporate taxes, Best Buy isn’t expanding until America’s middle class can afford to shop there again. Capisce?
Speaker Boehner must know this to be the case as well, after all, it’s not exactly a sophisticated concept, but his party’s unity on this and other issues is akin to shattered crystal being held together with superglue. The Republicans, if there even is such a thing as “the Republicans,” and I would argue there is not, have made it clear that they will do anything to maintain the status quo for big business, too-big-to-fail bankers and the wealthiest Americans. Now there’s a platform I’m sure will do very well in 2012… not.
What we should all have learned from watching the debt ceiling debates and our House Speaker run from a deal of his own making, is that we need politicians willing to take political chances, and in that regard we are woefully lacking. Mr. Boehner is but one example of where we’re coming up short, but if we the people don’t start speaking out soon, demanding that decisions be made in our country’s interest and not to appease the banking class, the price we will be forced to pay is sure to exceed our available balance.
And so I give you this month’s rear… House Speaker John Boehner… and our next President of the United States, Barack Obama. Now, I should say that my good friend Max Gardner disagrees with my forecast for the 2012 Presidential Election… he says Obama can’t… or at least may not… win.
Max is one of the smartest people I know and he’s no stranger to politics in this country, so when he talks… I listen. But, given the options I see today, I’m still going to vote for Obama in 2012… unless it’s raining… or something good is on TV… or my sock drawer looks like it needs to be rearranged.
The thing is… Max may just be right.
Although I don’t think I could prove what I’m about to say… one of the reasons Obama won in 2008 was that people believed that he would help save people from losing their homes to foreclosure. It’s not an issue that polls well, however, so I’m not sure if I could find actual data to support that statement, but I’m sure I’m right.
Fast forward to the mid-terms in 2010… the Democrats got their walking papers because of their mis-handling of the foreclosure crisis. Again, not an issue that polls well, but again I’m right.
Now let’s look at 2012… Florida, Arizona, Nevada, Ohio, and Michigan… all considered “swing states” and all hotbeds of the foreclosure crisis. Obama can’t win without these swing states… period. Those five states alone deliver 80 of the 270 electoral votes needed to win the presidency.
And a lot of people in these states that voted for Obama in 2008… well, they HATE him today. And yes, I do mean HATE him. Like, with the white hot intensity of a thousand suns… get the picture.
You see, Mandelman Matters is my own private focus group. I hear from so many homeowners from all across the country daily and over time I can take the pulse of a very large segment of voters. That’s why, in 2009 when I told a D.C. lobbyist that the Dems were going to get killed in the mid-terms and she didn’t believe me… well, I was right. So, even though I still believe that most folks won’t vote for the alternative no matter what, it’s starting to look possible that the distressed homeowner voting block, if there is such a thing, could sway the race.
The truth is, I think the GOP will be crushed if Max is right and Obama loses. The Republicans, if they’re thinking at all clearly, would have to be insane to want to win the presidency this time around. The House, they’ve already got… the Senate… well, they’d love to win that for sure. But the presidency? They’d have to be insane to want that brass ring this time around. Nope… Obama is perfect for the Republicans right where he is… he can’t get anything done… he loves Wall Street almost like Shelby loves Wall Street… and they get to blame everything that goes badly… on him. It’s really quite a fabulous arrangement if you look at it right.
So… bring on the Perrys… the Bachmans… the Palins… Newt… Mitt… Rudy… Huntsman… Johnson… Paul… or even Santorum. Oh, who am I forgetting… that’s right… what’s his name… you know… that black racist ex-banker… Cain, yeah, bring him back too… why the heck not? And some have even suggested that the GOP’s candidate hasn’t even announced his or her candidacy as yet.
Some are suggesting that it could be Jeb Bush that shows up on the ballot in 2012. To which I can only say… then one day he was shooting at some food and up through the ground came a bubbling crude. I think that would be cool… then maybe Hillary could run in 2016, and after that another Bush… followed by Chelsea Clinton… and after that another Bush.
Is it me, or has this whole American political thing become nothing more than a choice between frying pan or fire and brimstone? I’m starting to think the debates would be better with a laugh track.
Like I said… I’m voting for Obama again… assuming the weather holds up.
Mandelman out.
And please consider supporting the documentary I’m producing on the foreclosure crisis…
… because we can’t solve what we don’t understand in the first place.
Plus, a preview of tonight's Reagan Library debate.
Rick Perry’s decision to head back to Texas to deal with wildfires across his state may have annoyed the organizers of a conference in South Carolina, but it left an impression with some media outlets. As Jim Geraghty notes, the Washington Post isn’t too likely to give Perry many friendly headlines, but the Texas governor [...]
It looks like the Obama Administration is about to endorse some version of the Hubbard-Mayer plan of letting everyone (or at least everyone with an agency mortgage) refinance at today's low rates, regardless of whether they are delinquent or underwater. (Gotta love how the administration picks up a 3-year old Republican plan with obvious deficiencies and acts like it's fresh meat.) I fail to see how such a plan will accomplish much.
The ability to refinance depends heavily on whether a homeowner is current and has equity. Consider, then, the impact on the 4 categories of homeowners under this rubric:
(1) Borrowers who are current and have equity. Refinancing is always possibly for anyone who is current and has sufficient equity in their home. That's a lot of existing borrowers for whom a new refi program does nothing.
(2) Borrowers who are current but lack equity. There is also a large pool of borrowers who are current, but have insufficient equity or negative equity for a refinancing. A new refi program probably doesn't do much for them either. It doesn't take very much equity to do a FHA refinancing, but putting that aside, the Home Affordable Refinancing Program (HARP) allows for negative equity refinancings. There haven't been a lot of them, however, and I think that bodes poorly for any new program. The closing costs for refinancings can be a major obstacle for households without a lot of extra cash sitting around and with uncertainty as to whether they'll stay in an underwater house long enough for the lower rates to make the refinancing worthwhile.
(3) Borrowers who are delinquent, but have equity. These borrowers can already get out of the house via a sale. In any case, most of these borrowers are seriously delinquent, not just 1 or 2 months delinquent. Lower monthly mortgage payments aren't going to do a thing to change their delinquency or the pending foreclosure.
(4) Borrowers who are delinquent and lack equity. As with delinquent borrowers who have equity, most of these borrowers are seriously delinquent, not just 1 or 2 months delinquent. Lower monthly mortgage payments aren't going to do a thing to change their delinquency or the pending foreclosure.
So in the end, it's really not clear who this would help. It ignores that there's already been lots of refinancing at low rates since 2008--it's not clear how much more refinancing some new initiative will possibly produce, much less how many foreclosures it will prevent. The refi idea seems to do nothing on either negative equity or unemployment. Any program that fails to address those just isn't serious. I get that the administration has a MacGyver problem given that it can't move anything in Congress, but that necessitates much more creativity, financially and legally, not rewarming old ideas. My prediction: this ends up accomplishing about as much as FHAShortRefi or Hope4Homeowners.
We need a TARP for Main Street. This isn't it.
Ultra Viresis
a Latin phrase meaning literally “beyond the powers”, although its standard legal translation and substitute is “beyond power”. If an act requires legal authority and it is done with such authority, it is characterised in law as intra vires (literally “within the powers”; standard legal translation and substitute, “within power”). If it is done without such authority, it is ultra vires. Acts that are intra vires may equivalently be termed “valid” and those that are ultra vires “invalid”.
Just because you have an assignment or a deed or any other document purportedly executed on behalf of a corporation, does not mean that it is valid. If the person executing does not have the authority or if the act itself is not authorized by the corporation, the act is not valid. Here’s a clear example. Two clients come in my office, the President of a corporation “sells” a property to my client and the client writes a check for $500,000. Problem is I didn’t examine the corporate records and I didn’t see the corporate books so I didn’t catch that the President was not authorized by the Board of Directors to sell the property….the deed is invalid and I’m in big trouble. Many across the country have been making the argument that the MERS signing officers system is similarly flawed because the corporate procedures are not followed. Such is the case in a case filed in Texas. The text of the Order released by a federal judge spells all this out…
Defendants argue that Plaintiff alleges that MERS’ corporate secretary appointed Blackstun as a MERS assistant secretary, and the appointment was not valid because Blackstun’s appointment was not also approved by MERS’ board of directors, as allegedly required by MERS’ by-laws. Defendants argue that this is negligence at best, and not fraud. Defendants also assert that the party that would be the defrauded party would be MERS, not Plaintiff, and that Plaintiff’s interest in the Property is wholly unaffected by the assignment.
Plaintiff argues that the Assignment filed in the property records is a fraudulent lien claim. Plaintiff alleges that the assignment is void because it was executed by a person neither employed nor authorized by MERS to execute a conveyance. Plaintiff alleges that MERS intended that the document be given the same effect as a lawfully executed instrument, and the execution and filing of the documents were done for the purpose of harming Plaintiff. Plaintiff alleges that there was a scheme on the part of a MERS officer to bypass the Board of Directors and cloak others with authority only allowed by the Board of Directors. Plaintiff argues that this is not an inadvertent failure to comply with a duty, but rather an intentional act, done knowingly with the specific intent that the consequences of his action be brought to fruition.
In this case it is alleged that MERS did not properly appoint Blackstun as an officer of MERS and that Blackstun did not have authority to bind MERS, and when Blackstun executed the assignment, it caused MERS to file a fraudulent document in the deed records. The Court finds that Plaintiff has stated a plausible claim, in part, because Defendants fail to address the issue of the legal effect of Blackstun not being authorized to execute the assignment. If he had no such authority, MERS would know that fact. It appears to be more than mere negligence by MERS. Discovery should be allowed, and after discovery is completed, the issue of whether there is a valid claim under ß12.002 can be determined by a motion for summary judgment.
Read all the pleadings for much more on this most interesting discussion, also read the deposition of MERS officer Hultman below.
But there was another post I did yesterday which really had me thinking. It’s the Reveredo case which is cited in a recently published article in the esteemed Cardozo Law Review Journal. What is most astonishing about all of this dustup is (as expressed by Judge Walt Logan in Azize) the fact that MERS just came out of nowhere, no legislation, no court order and spread all across this country. Another key opinion acknowledges this point but the court just shrugs its collective shoulders and says, “hey we know all this MERS stuff ain’t exactly legal, but what the heck, what can possibly go wrong?”…..
“To the extent that courts have encountered difficulties with the question, and have even ruled to the contrary of our conclusion,” the court opined, “the problem arises from the difficulty of attempting to shoehorn a modern innovative instrument of commerce into nomenclature and legal categories which stem essentially from the medieval English land law.” (suggesting that a formalistic application of foreclosure law might lead to the conclusion that MERS lacks standing to foreclose in some circumstances, but “no substantive rights, obligations or defenses are affected by the use of the MERS device, [so] there is no reason why mere form should overcome the salutary substance of permitting the use of this commercially effective means of business”).
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
I’m frequently warning about the creeping terror of the Jack Booted Thugs. The banks are kicking down doors all across this country and even when law enforcement is called, they are allowing the banks to get away with it.
These acts are terribly dangerous because they set up a creeping precedent that destroys one of our most basic rights….the right to be secure and safe in your home.
I want to show you an example of the what happens when these practices continue unabated…..please watch it very carefully. Please google the name Jose Guerena, a father who served his country as a United States Marine. Read all the facts in this case and the statements from the police. When you hear that hailstorm of bullets that kill this soldier in cold blood….I want to know whether you believe you are watching a cold blooded murder.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
WHAT IN GOD’S NAME IS HAPPENING IN THIS COUNTRY? First New Jersey’s Supreme Court Chief Justice slams the foreclosure mills, now go over to 4ClosureFraud and see what the good judges in Ohio are doing.
Meanwhile in Florida, the foreclosure mills have appealed the Florida Attorney’s investigation of them claiming that acts of law firms were not within the Florida Attorney General’s jurisdiction. On another front, the foreclosure mills appealed the application of rules that were established by the Florida Supreme Court. When the appeal didn’t work they just ignored the Florida Supreme Court’s Verified Complaint Rule.
I wonder how this will all play out. Will our courts uphold the rule of law and slam the mills operating across the country or will our courts wimper down in the face of the absurd challenges to their authority that the mills will continue to present?
Are we not a nation of laws?
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
Police? They don’t care.
Lawsuits? “They don’t even phase me anymore.”
I’m sending out a warning to everyone who can read this. Whether you are involved in any way with foreclosures or not, you need to be aware that YOU CAN NO LONGER BE SAFE OR SECURE IN YOUR OWN HOME.
Banks and lenders have become so emboldened that they have decided they can KICK DOWN YOUR DOOR ANYTIME THEY DAMN WELL PLEASE.
The reason why this issue is so important for everyone to understand is that our system of laws and basic rights have broken down so dramatically that that the thugs responsible for these brazen acts are no longer afraid of any consequences. As indicated in the attached article that appeared in today’s Palm Beach Post, they’re “Not even phased” by lawsuits anymore. I can tell you from reports from all over the state, you cannot count on law enforcement to stop such brazen attacks. Please read the newspaper article, lawsuit and police reports. And the next time you lock your doors and leave your home, thinking that your possessions are safe, THINK AGAIN, because even if you’re not in foreclosure, THE LENDERS WILL KICK DOWN YOUR DOORS IF THEY WANT TO .
It just sickens me to know what this country has become and it’s only going to get worse.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
The US Treasury Department initially estimated that we would spend $50 billion dollars on the HAMP Mortgage Modification Program. So what have we gotten from our $50 billion dollars worth of spending?
According to the July 2010 numbers, less than 400,000 permanent modifications!
That’s your federal government hard at work with your money. So with that much money floating around, what’s the real point of the HAMP program? It seems to me that we’ve only fattened the coffers of the lenders and servicers at considerable expense to US taxpayers.
The HAMP failure is just another example of the total failure of federal government to provide any meaningful help to consumers while at the same time, rewarding the the lenders and servicers that caused this crisis with billions of dollars of your money.
I want our local judges to consider the fairness and equity of throwing their neighbors out on the street and rewarding the architects of the fraud and the crisis that has now infected our courtrooms. I think it especially relevant that our judges consider these acts in light of the fact that the homeowner they are throwing into the street is helping to fund their own dispossession to the tune of the $50 billion in taxpayer funding to the servicers and lenders.
Tweet this!
Share and Enjoy:
From M. Solimon
Editor’s Note: Pretty Good Entry From M. Solimon discussing aspects of fraud. I would add the following:
- FRAUD: A false statement wherein the speaker knows it is false, intends for it to be relied upon to the detriment of the receiver, who does reasonably rely on it to his/her financial detriment.
- FRAUD IN THE EXECUTION: A trick where the signor believes he/she is signing something other than what the document says it is. Probably applicable in the mortgage mess because the truth is people did not know they were signing the equivalent of their own financial destruction whereas the parties presenting the document pretended it was a standard mortgage loan that had been properly subject to industry standard verification and underwriting standards.
- FRAUD IN THE INDUCEMENT: A lie causing a person to execute a document, and otherwise meeting the definition of FRAUD as above. Examples “This is the fair market value of your new house,” or “Housing prices always go up, nevr down,” or “we’ll be able to refinance the property, give you more money out of it, all before the time for reset of the payments.”
Deceit and fraud are defined separately in statutes. Under Civ. Code §§1709 and 1710, deceit is defined in simple terms. See Civ. Code §§1572 for both actual fraud and 1573constructive fraud.
Loook at Liability for actual fraud is limited to acts committed by or with the connivance of a party to a contract with the intent to deceive another party to the contract and induce that party to enter into the contract. Look under Civ. Code §1572
Deceit is appropriate under a material beach or perhaps cause of action. The notion of a lender, who willfully deceives its borrowers or customers leading to foreclosure so to remedy an investor issue and to avoid recourse.
]I suggest you use it there or for the servicing argument for showing the willful intent to induce the consumer homeowners of a right to modifications ad compliance with 2923. to alter his or her position towards litigation (and eat up the balance of legal reserves their intended for a defense and their attorneys). These guys, I know all too well and it’s all too much. The consumer’s injury or risk is liable for any damage suffered as a result of the deceit. [Civ. Code §1709] etc, etc.
My take on this is too isolate the actual fraud that consists of any of the following acts, committed by or with the connivance of a party to a contract who is the assignor and its agents and not the successors.
The argument is it is with willful intent a lost beneficial interest woefully deceives a trustor or mortgagor to the contract, solely to induce the other party to enter into the contract [see Civ. Code §1572]:
Deceit and Actual Fraud combined
•Servicing rights violate SEC 1122 AB,
•Accounting rules violations under FAS 140, FIN 115,
•Trust assets are restricted to passive investments,
•Lenders controlling interest revoke the powers of sale and foreclosure,
•Parties lack standing to bring a foreclosure by appointment,
•Conspiracy to commit fraud where Trustee, Beneficiary and Transferee are all one in the same
•Bid rigging at trustee sale
•Fraud perpetrated against the country recorder
•A nominal interest has powers that conflict in the original assignment,
•Violations of the Code of federal regulations “CFR”
Your feed back will be critical and evident where I have gone as far as I can. It’s not getting through to skilled litigators that still don’t get it. Maybe I am lacking your codifications eloquence and ledger capacity to zero into the abuses of GAAP in more subtle terms; LOL!
he head of the OCC stated in 2009 “I don’t know why getting relief from offering modifications is not working?”
It’s simple “BECAUSE LENDERS FORECLOSING DON’T OWN THE ASSETS THEY SOLD ….for starters.
That said, even after the effort and inability for the US Secretary to further tweak FASB to get them to completely roll over.
Few are winning here. Even Judges who are deciding the matter favorably are commenting from a wrong perspective. There is no demand on UCC judicial interpretations for perfection in a bonefide sale.
The District Courts hearing these chapter proceedings provide comments after deciding the matter favorably are merely suggesting it’s all about “get it right next time”. That wrong where it says’s to a lender they can bring it back, even when a decision is favorable.
The key arguments come down to the fact the lender transfers each receivable as a “whole loan” sale. For Pete’s sake, looks at the general ledger where the asset was entered as a “Receivable” and “Loan Held for Sale”.
That’s not “Loan Held to Maturity” but “Sale”.
The cost to capitalize and reserve a 30 year loan held to maturity defeats the arguments lenders are making that “they did not sell the subject loan. It’s the old “blank assignment” gimmick. Its arguments are lost in court where the problem peaks the Judges curiosity and that’s about it.
We know the value of the open assignment argument is defining for the court where it’s a bank surety and liquidity play. It’s also a GAAP disclosure fraud.
Therein the consumer is disadvantaged arguing defects after being instrumental in a lenders shuffling of assets for maintaining REPO requirements and in its pursuit for shareholder earnings and profitability.
My take on the matter is to let them have the consumer’s home. The consumer then makes the lender pay the price of foreclosure claiming recognition, for reclassifying the sales as debt and restating earnings.
These UD attorneys are so smart that they may cost these bank power houses a debt load totaling about $3 trillion and more in liabilities left off the books. It’s a scary thought actually where you put Citigroup out while not looking and as they still struggle with a $65 billion tax tab carried by consumer taxpayers. BAC may end fighting for their life with a private right to call receivership.
Foreclosures cannot continue in violation of GAAP and where lenders circumvent basis accounting laws while continuing to force the sale treatment issue and while denying they are controlling assets.
It’s the best of both worlds with sale on the front side and as if it was leveraged borrowing upon liquidation and egress.
As we sit I’ll show you the subtle instances of apparently innocent manipulation and confusion befallen o to the courts from errors and omissions which lenders are getting away with. That is happening as the courts say . . . . So what!
The errors and omissions are the desperate means for seeking to maintain some semblance of SFAS140 adherence while employing lawyers as third parties appointed by agents of agents by a nominal interest.
I personally have given up on the right MERS arguments as MERS is entitled to act as an accommodation and even a nominal interest, possibly.
It’s just so easy for one to see the obvious that it has become lost. The nominee cannot execute instruments upon being replaced by the signature below it. Hello guys, right! That’s the purpose of the nominee! And, while one courts rules in favor of the consumer it misses the call.
Something basic is getting lost and I’m not getting through. Unique “floating” entities cannot appear from nowhere to execute assignments by virtue of meritless appointments.
If one of your cases is picked up by the Fed it should register a nice settlement . As one District court judge put it with disgust. . . “The SEC is turning into a penalty and fine system where they are to quick to settle the matter for a couple hundred million every time allowing the defendants’ to save face.”
“That’s not bad!
The US AG office thinks there is a case for bid rigging but I’m not sure the AG’s office knows where to look. Yet as one Judge told me in court “speak English.”
The precise and distinct GAAP and FASB rules violation are clearly demonstrated in each foreclosure. Lenders are violating GAAP even with the recent codification, including revisions and interpretation.
It’s all mind boggling when you consider the distance in communication here and counsel’s alternative to grab the lowest hanging fruit. . . .A RESPA audit (what is that anyway) and a QWR that together are just not going to cut it.
These bank execs fail to realize maybe that these and other Enron style crimes, like those stated in the Fastow confessional, will gets you 10 years . . .at least.
M.Soliman
Witness to Counsel
Expert.witness@live.com
Foreclosure News