War on the Home Front | Mortgage Loan Investigations | Securitization Audits

Dec

I believe the answer is yes. I think the problems are so wild and out of control that most of them will come under some kind of investigation or suit eventually. I think the only reason we’re not seeing major action so far is the problems are just too big and unwieldy…but Christmas is over and these problems are not going away…..time for us all to dig in and get to work….

SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) - Kamala Harris takes over as California’s attorney general next week with dodgy bank foreclosure practices in her sights and lawsuits against major banks in her realm of possibilities.

For the up-and-coming Democratic star — the state’s first woman, South Indian and African American attorney general — her predecessor and California Governor-elect Jerry Brown is a model to follow in cracking down on lenders.

But while Brown scored an early settlement against banks as home foreclosures mushroomed in California, other states have been more aggressive of late. Borrower activists are hoping Harris will make the most populous U.S. state a more powerful ally against the banks.

Reuters

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Dec

BANK BREAK INS- New York Times- What Will You Do To Stop This Tyranny?

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Foreclosure Fraud, Weidner

17721Leave a Comment2010-12-22+11%3A21%3A30Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

It’s happening all over the country…banks breaking into people’s homes, with no court order, with no legal authority, with no right to do so. Taking property, trashing homes, ruining lives….sometimes when there are no mortgages on the property at all…

One of my cases is mentioned in the article, and it’s important for everyone in America to understand that the conduct of these banks has gotten so totally out of hand because we’ve become week, meek, soft and compliant. It is only through the intervention of federal cases that something might be done to reduce such conduct….right now it is rampant and unchecked.

Read from the article below and consider how these lives are destroyed by these practices…what has this country become?

In an era when millions of homes have received foreclosure notices nationwide, lawsuits detailing bank break-ins like the one at Ms. Ash’s house keep surfacing. And in the wake of the scandal involving shoddy, sometimes illegal paperwork that has buffeted the nation’s biggest banks in recent months, critics say these situations reinforce their claims that the foreclosure process is fundamentally flawed.

“Every day, smaller wrongs happen to people trying to save their homes: being charged the wrong amount of money, being wrongly denied a loan modification, being asked to hand over documents four or five times,” said Ira Rheingold, executive director of the National Association of Consumer Advocates.

Identifying the number of homeowners who were locked out illegally is difficult. But banks and their representatives insist that situations like Ms. Ash’s represent just a tiny percentage of foreclosures.

READ FULL ARTICLE HERE

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Dec

Judge Dismisses 127 Foreclosure Lawsuits For Improper Verification….

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Foreclosure Fraud, Weidner

17334Leave a Comment2010-12-16+12%3A20%3A37Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

Too bad it’s in New York. I wish judges were doing things like this in Florida, but we see very little of this sort of thing. What we do see is continued abuse by the banks and law firms (I’m still getting complaints that are non-verified even today). As a taxpayer I wonder why this is still allowed to occur. I wonder why there is no consequence to blatantly violating the rules of the Supreme Court of Florida…I find it all so mind blowing….

STOPFORECLOSUREFRAUD

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Dec

BOMBSHELL- MERS v. Azize- Florida’s Sixth Circuit Got Foreclosure Right Before the Crisis

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Weidner

16687Leave a Comment2010-12-05+13%3A28%3A10Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

The entire country knows that we are right in the middle of a real crisis. It’s a crisis of confidence that is shaking the very foundation of our country as we all question the economic, political and judicial systems we all live under. Clearly there are major problems in each of these systems. I find it interesting that Florida’s Sixth Judicial Circuit on Florida’s West Coast has received a good deal of outside press and other attention about this foreclosure crisis and wanted to dig a little deeper. The good judges of this circuit have had a problem with the way foreclosures have been conducted for a long time….as it turns out now….apparently with very good reason.

The inquiry got me thinking about a case that started long before the crisis, way back in 2005. Way back then one of our good Circuit Court judges had a problem with the way he saw foreclosures being conducted in his courtroom. He specifically had a problem with the way a nominee or straw party, MERS or Mortgage Electronic Registration System, was filing thousands of foreclosure lawsuits and he questioned how MERS could act as the Plaintiff when it did not actually own the note or have a real interest in the underlying debt.

The interesting this is this judge sua sponte or on his own, called up all the cases in his docket where MERS was the Plaintiff. He exercised his judicial authority and conducted an inquiry of the facts and circumstances surrounding MERS’ participation in foreclosure litigation. It should be noted that in this particular case, no Defendant ever appeared or filed any pleading at all. But that did not stop the judge from raising his inquiry. He had questions about what was happening in his courtroom so he pulled all the cases and set up a formal inquiry. YOU MUST READ THE ENTIRE ORDER AND PAY ATTENTION TO THE DEEP INQUIRY BEING CONDUCTED BY THE JUDGE….

After the inquiry, the judge determined that MERS didn’t have the appropriate skin in the game to foreclose, so he dismissed this case AND ALL OTHER CASES in his docket where MERS was the Plaintiff. The Second District Court of Appeals subsequently reversed him on this, but there are several important points. First, the appellate court did not repudiate his entire line of inquiry or reasoning, they only suggested that it was a little too broad based on the facts before them in that particular case. Next, reading the appellate opinion carefully, you will note that in footnote number two the appellate court specifically noted that it was relevant for a Plaintiff to establish how and why it became entitled to enforce a mortgage. Finally, it is critical to note that even though the appellate court reversed the good trial judge in this case, MERS’ practice changed dramatically after this case and they almost never filed as a Plaintiff in the State of Florida again.

Azize was not a “Win” for MERS and the appellate court did not expressly repudiate the legal inquiry being conducted, the appellate court merely pointed out some technical problems with that particular case. The point is this circuit got the issues right long before foreclosures devolved into the morass they are today. Just think of how much better shape we’d all be in today if we had all stopped and paid attention to the questions asked by this judge in this case. What if the lenders and the plaintiffs in all these cases that are clogging our courts had taken the time and spent the effort to get their paperwork straight to show ownership clearly and without question way back in 2005? The mess that clogs our courts and pollutes our system of record title ownership was warned of very clearly and quite specifically long before it all spun so wildly out of control….if only we would have listened…..

MERS v. AZIZE

Order Dismissing MERS

Is this the next decision out of the Sixth Judicial Circuit on the Order and Magnitude of Azize?

StentzOrder

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Nov

Investor and Institutional Lawsuits Offer Keys to Defending Homeowners in Foreclosure

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Foreclosure Fraud, Weidner

16031Leave a Comment2010-11-18+11%3A20%3A04Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

We all know that most, if not all, of the subprime lenders that were originating the loans we are now defending for homeowners were engaging in various degrees of widespread fraud and deceit in order to close the loans. Our borrower clients were not sophisticated enough to catch the fraud or participate in it, but every level of the originating lenders were. Take the attached lawsuit against filed by a mortgage insurance company against Countrywide Home Loans for instance, in it,

They admit we didn’t actually review the loans we were insuring, we trusted Countrywide and relied on our “delegated” model for reviewing. (That means we didn’t look at all at the loans, we just issued an insurance policy.) The astonishing this is that there were billions of dollars sloshing around between originating the loans with shady brokers here on the ground level to when they were packaged, insured and sold to trustee, then investors and no one was actually looking at the loans themselves. I was a broker, we made loans and we would never do a loan unless we actually looked at everything, credit, income, visit the home.

The subprime mess was caused because no one, and I mean no one was looking at anything and they were all lying to one another…every player at every step in the process. And they needed unsophisticated players like our clients to start the chain of lies that started when the loans were originated then went all the way to the White House.

There is so much pushback from the remaining servicers and lenders who are fighting and preventing even reasonable modifications from occurring. One fascinating thing that befuddles me is the fact that if the laws on fraud and improper inducement were really followed here that might provide us with real opportunities to use proven allegations of fraud to force the hands in these modifications.

Read the lawsuit and let’s use the swarm strategies to pull all these pieces together.

countrywidelawsuit

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Nov

Is Your Foreclosure Final Judgment Void or Voidable? Rally Saturday November 20, TAMPA

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | General, Weidner

15601Leave a Comment2010-11-09+11%3A30%3A41Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

When I started defending foreclosures years ago there was no real defense. The homeowner did not pay, the plaintiff was suing and they were eventually going to win. My how things have changed in a short period of time. Today there are widespread and well substantiated allegations of fraud and improper practices on the part of banks, mortgage companies and the law firms and other agents working to throw Americans out into the streets. In so many cases the question is not whether your client is going to lose the case, but how many questionable things can you find in the foreclosure lawsuit.

This leads us to the emerging line of legal questioning the community of Foreclosure Defense Warriors are engaged in and that is whether previously entered judgments are Void or merely Voidable. That question looms like a 800 pound Gorrilla in courtrooms all across this state. When the full specter of issues related to flawed Service of Process is raised, we will have a real sense of how big the most glaring issues of blatantly Void judgments are. All judgments based on fraudulent service are VOID. They don’t exist, they did not happen. To the homeowner living in that new home after purchasing from the bank…..sorry, but you don’t actually own that home, your deed is worthless. To the bank that gave that mortgage to purchase that home, your lien is not valid. This line of inquiry is shaking the title industry to the core as they struggle to play a game of “Not my problem; it’s yours”…trying to pass the liability off on the lenders who foreclosed. Next, the investors are trying to hold the servicers and lenders accountable as evidenced by the recent letter from Deutsche Bank to the servicers stating, “we ain’t gonna be liable for your screw ups”. This showdown is also a focal point of investor lawsuits against the major servicers, most especially Bank of America. They’re all saying, you guys screwed this up and we’re not going to hold the bag. (Bank of America is saying “Screw You” you’re on your own. Obama is saying, “foreclosures are good, we don’t need no moratorium.)

These are not abstract questions that will have no consequences. In fact, during a recent meeting of the judges and attorneys in Florida’s Sixth Judicial Circuit, it was acknowledged that these questions are going to plague our courts for years to come, as you can read in the attached article in the St. Petersburg Times.

“Even when judgments have been entered and sales have happened, they may say, ‘Whoa, that may have been sold improperly,’ ” McGrady said. “We’re going to have title issues and all those things. And every motion, everything that’s brought to the attention of the court will require a hearing of some sort. We’re working through it, but it will take that much longer.”

This issue is part of the larger and important work of a highly specialized group of foreclosure defense attorneys who have a broad range of experiences and who meet in secret locations regularly to discuss such issues and work through the much deeper and more significantly troubling aspects of this foreclosure insanity. The JEDTIS (Jurists Engaged in Defense of Title Integrity) are a group formed by Clearwater attorney Greg Clark and include some of the brightest minds in all areas of the law. If you’re looking to determine whether you have title claims, void (or voidable) judgments or have any number of other claims related to your foreclosure suit, especially any potential appellate cases, contact me for a referral to one of the JEDTI Masters.

For those attorneys who are just beginning your inquiry into VOID or VOIDABLE judgments, please see some of the initial case law research and discussions on the issues. The following is intended to assist attorneys in reviewing and intake of cases, please forward your cases to me for review and consideration by the JEDTI masters who are standing by ready to return the rightful owners to their property after proving up that the current “owners” of homes are merely posessors of the home subject to VOID deeds.

Judgments which are void at the outset, may on motion at any time be vacated. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540 (b).

Diligence to serve by publication: Wiggam v. Bamford, 562 So. 2d 389 (4 DCA 1990), Gans v. Heathgate-Sunflower Homeowners, 593 So. 2d 549 (4 DCA 1992), Hobe Sound Ind. Park v. 1st Union Nat. Bank, 594 So. 2d 334 (4 DCA 1992); Batchin v. Barnett Bank, 647 So. 2d 211 (2 DCA 1994). Forecl judgment entered where sworn statement defective on its face voids sale, even as to non-party bidder. Gans; HOWEVER, see later 4th DCA case Demars, which says it is only voidable. See also Fund Concept, Forecls V. Absentee Owners, Jan 93; and III Fla. Real Property Practice (CLE 1976), s. 5.26. Sworn statement need not set out search facts, but judgment voidable if insuffic diligence, so better practice to set out. Demars v. Village of Sandalwood LAkes, 625 So. 2d 1219 (4 DCA 1993).

If the trial judge were to find the affidavit to be defective on its face, service would be void as to the bona fide purchaser. If the trial judge finds the affidavit sufficient on its face, but were to determine that a diligent search was not performed, the foreclosure would be voidable, not void, as to the bona fide purchaser. See generally 33 Fla. Jur. 2d Judicial Sales § 13 (2009). On the face of the affidavit of diligent search before us, we find that the affidavit is sufficient for purposes of service by publication and that the trial court did not grossly abuse its discretion in so holding. In light of the necessary reliance on the public record by a bona fide purchaser, the affidavit of diligent search was sufficient on its face to establish that an adequate search had been made to locate an address for service upon Lewis prior to effecting constructive service. The resultant foreclosure sale to the bona fide purchaser cannot be set aside. First Home View Corp. v. Guggino, 10 So. 3d 164 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (holding that trial court errs in vacating final judgment of foreclosure in sale of property to bona fide purchaser where homeowner is constructively served by publication and affidavit of diligent search is legally sufficient to establish that an adequate search has been made prior to constructive service); Southeast & Assoc. v. Fox Run Homeowners Ass’n, 704 So. 2d 694 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (holding that notice by publication is adequate where affidavit of diligent search is facially sufficient and foreclosure sale to bona fide purchaser is merely voidable, and not void, and cannot be set aside)

847 So.2d 555 RINAS v.RINAS; 1D09-2170 SOUTHEAST LAND DEVELOPERS v. ALL FLORIDA SITE AND UTILITIES, INC.,; 625 So.2d 1219 18 Fla. L. Weekly D911, DEMARS v. SANDALWOOD LAKES; 168 So.2d 183 EVANS v. HYDEMAN

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Oct

Oops, I lost my summons! Oops, I lost my summons! (Repeat 9,000 times)

By MattWeidner | Weidner

14315Leave a Comment2010-10-14+10%3A43%3A39MattWeidner

Remember, Press Conference today at 10:30 in Orlando with U.S. Congressman Alan Grayson. If you’re press struggling to grasp how significant the whole ForeclosureGate controversy is…you should attend. If you are a homeowner in foreclosure, you should attend. If you’re just an everyday American who is sick and tired of the abuses of the banks and institutions that now own and run this country, you should attend. What happened to Nancy Jacobini should never, ever happen in this country and what’s still happening to every American stuck in this nightmare should not be allowed to continue.

IT WILL ONLY STOP WHEN WE ALL STAND UP TOGETHER AND DEMAND AN END TO THIS

WAKE UP, RISE UP, STAND TOGETHER AND STAND YOUR GROUND

SEE YOU IN ORLANDO AT 10:30 AM!

Our entire foreclosure process, and now a significant portion of the title to real property in this country now rests on the shoulders of largely unregulated, unpoliced and until now, unnoticed subset of the foreclosure mill/foreclosure cockroach community. The Private Process Servers. Who are process servers? In Florida, a Plaintiff must personally hand an original summons issued by the court, along with the lawsuit to every defendant in a foreclosure case. The Sheriff appoints private parties to serve these lawsuits on these people, but any knucklehead can become a process server. The requirements are to become a process server are defined in Florida Statutes, but here’s the bombshell.

THERE IS SO MUCH BAD SERVICE OF PROCESS FLOATING ACROSS THIS STATE THAT IT’S GOING TO MAKE THE ROBOSIGNER CONTROVERSY SEEM SMALL

What is bad service? Not actually serving the defendant in the case, but lying to the court and saying the person was served. You see, a process server must file with the court an Affidavit of Service, an original document where he swears to the court, “On February 1, 2o10 at 4:10 pm, I personally served Matthew Weidner with a copy of the lawsuit and summons at his home at 1229 Central, St. Petersburg 33705. Weidner was 5 feet 2 inches tall, black and weighed about 200 pounds.”

The problem is Matthew Weidner is white, 6 foot 1, weighs 165 and on February 1, 2010 at 4:10 pm he was on a flight bound for California….that service could never have happened so the process server lied. The big, big, big problem with service such as this example is…..

JUDGMENTS BASED ON FRAUDULENT SERVICE ARE VOID

Let that sink in and think about it. VOID. Not Voidable, but VOID AB INITIO or invalid from the outset. How many tens of thousands of titles to real property across this country are affected by this problem? Impossible to say at this point in time, but anecdotally, I see far too many cases of flawed service than we should ever permit. Elderly people, illiterate people, minorities that couldn’t avoid service or leave their homes even if they wanted to. And yet, the numbers of Affidavits of Diligent Search and Inquiry and Constructive Service in foreclosure cases is HUGE. No one was supervising the process servers. The lowly process server who got paid the same $25 if he was serving (or not serving) a foreclosure complaint on a $50,000 mortgage or a $5,000,000 mortgage. And now the fate of our entire title insurance industry and in fact our entire economy rests on the truth and veracity of the Affidavits of Service of Process that have been filed by these unregulated, unsupervised process servers.

Have a look at just two initial reports that were produced which provide some insight into this problem. How in God’s name have courts permitted this many summons to be lost? How in God’s name have we allowed so many foreclosure lawsuits to proceed based on constructive service? There are no legitimate answers to these questions. But then read the very lax requirements that are in place for process servers in this state. GOD HELP US ALL.

Copy of LostSummonsReport

constructiveService

Florida Statutes 48.021 Process; by whom served.

—

(1)All process shall be served by the sheriff of the county where the person to be served is found, except initial nonenforceable civil process, criminal witness subpoenas, and criminal summonses may be served by a special process server appointed by the sheriff as provided for in this section or by a certified process server as provided for in ss. 48.25-48.31. Civil witness subpoenas may be served by any person authorized by rules of civil procedure.

(2)(a)The sheriff of each county may, in his or her discretion, establish an approved list of natural persons designated as special process servers. The sheriff shall add to such list the names of those natural persons who have met the requirements provided for in this section. Each natural person whose name has been added to the approved list is subject to annual recertification and reappointment by the sheriff. The sheriff shall prescribe an appropriate form for application for appointment. A reasonable fee for the processing of the application shall be charged.

(b)A person applying to become a special process server shall:

1.Be at least 18 years of age.

2.Have no mental or legal disability.

3.Be a permanent resident of the state.

4.Submit to a background investigation that includes the right to obtain and review the criminal record of the applicant.

5.Obtain and file with the application a certificate of good conduct that specifies there is no pending criminal case against the applicant and that there is no record of any felony conviction, nor a record of a mIsdemeanor involving moral turpitude or dishonesty, with respect to the applicant within the past 5 years.

6.Submit to an examination testing the applicant’s knowledge of the laws and rules regarding the service of process. The content of the examination and the passing grade thereon, and the frequency and the location at which the examination is offered must be prescribed by the sheriff. The examination must be offered at least once annually.

7.Take an oath that the applicant will honestly, diligently, and faithfully exercise the duties of a special process server.

(c)The sheriff may prescribe additional rules and requirements directly related to subparagraphs (b)1.-7. regarding the eligibility of a person to become a special process server or to have his or her name maintained on the list of special process servers.

(d)An applicant who completes the requirements of this section must be designated as a special process server provided that the sheriff of the county has determined that the appointment of special process servers is necessary or desirable. Each special process server must be issued an identification card bearing his or her identification number, printed name, signature and photograph, and an expiration date. Each identification card must be renewable annually upon proof of good standing.

(e)The sheriff shall have the discretion to revoke an appointment at any time that he or she determines a special process server is not fully and properly discharging the duties as a special process server. The sheriff shall institute a program to determine whether the special process servers appointed as provided for in this section are faithfully discharging their duties pursuant to such appointment, and a reasonable fee may be charged for the costs of administering such program.

(3)A special process server appointed in accordance with this section shall be authorized to serve process in only the county in which the sheriff who appointed him or her resides and may charge a reasonable fee for his or her services.

(4)Any special process server shall be disinterested in any process he or she serves; and if the special process server willfully and knowingly executes a false return of service or otherwise violates the oath of office, he or she shall be guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided for in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084, and shall be permanently barred from serving process in Florida

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Oct

LISTEN TO THIS TERRIFING 911 CALL- BANK BREAKING DOWN A DOOR!

By MattWeidner | Weidner

13900Leave a Comment2010-10-06+04%3A36%3A35MattWeidner

The banks and institutions that now run this country are running abs0lutely wild and out of control. They do not fear judges or law enforcement. They do not fear any law.

They do not need permission to kick down your front door, steal what they want and throw everything else into the streets.

As one of the owners of a company who specializes in “securing” or “winterizing” properties was recently quoted in the Palm Beach Post said, “Lawsuits don’t phase us anymore.”

I WANT ALL OF AMERICA TO WATCH THE ATTACHED NEWS STORY AND LISTEN TO ALL TEN MINUTES OF THE ATTACHED 911 PHONE CALL.

HEAR THE TERROR IN THIS WOMAN’S VOICE.

THIS WOMAN WAS NOT IN FORECLOSURE. THIS WOMAN’S HOME WAS IN PERFECT, PRISTINE CONDITION. SHE WAS RELAXING COMFORTABLY ON HER COUCH WHEN A BURGLAR CAME KICKING DOWN HER DOOR.

IT WAS A BURGLAR HIRED BY THE BANK BREAKING DOWN HER DOOR.

WATCH THE VIDEO BELOW

http://www.wftv.com/video/25278100/index.html?taf=orlc

LISTEN TO THE FULL 911 PHONE CALL HERE

PalmBeachPost

This is what this country has become people and no one seems to care about it anymore. I truly fear that all hope is lost. These lenders have absolutely no right to do what they are doing yet neither law enforcement nor judges care to do anything about this terrifying phenomena.

Please find and share with me stories such as this. The only hope we have of turning this around is getting the word out there and hoping that our press picks up on these stories.

Please forward this to Realtors, attorneys and activists. No bank has any right to come onto any person’s property and they certainly do not have any right to kick down a person’s door unless and until they have an Order from a judge.

PLEASE SHARE YOUR STORIES WITH ME.

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Oct

Another BOMBSHELL- a HUGE class action lawsuit agiant MERS, GMAC, BAC….and others.

By MattWeidner | Weidner

13784Leave a Comment2010-10-03+20%3A51%3A45MattWeidner

This crisis is going to spawn at least as many lawsuits as the foreclosures started….have a read on this class action suit that was forwarded to me. If there is any justice left in this country, there will be indictments, punishment and penalties for all those who were involved in this incredible fraud….

RICOClassActionComplaint

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Sep

Your Federal Government- The Real Party at Interest in Foreclosure Fraud? (Mother Jones Story)

By MattWeidner | Weidner

13526Leave a Comment2010-09-27+23%3A19%3A16MattWeidner

One of the many, many dirty secrets that will come out about all this foreclosure fraud that is burning across this country is the fact that the Good Old Uncle Sam is not only right smack dab in the middle of it, but that your federal government signed off and is in fact paying the massive profits the purveyors of all the fraud are making.

It’s no secret that the federal government, through Fannie and Freddie are the real owners of a huge percentage of the mortgages that are being foreclosed on. The Plaintiff name may be Aurora or Litton or Bank of America or the IXIS 2003 Loan Trust, but when the Certificate of Title is issued or the bid assigned or the real interest in the property is conveyed, we will all be blown away when we discover just how many times the real party in interest is Uncle Sam. I am convinced that this fact is concealed because what would this country (or the rest of the world) think about the federal government coming to take your home or 260,000 homes across the State of Florida? And yet that is exactly what is happening.

There is one other key fact in all of this. The federal government largely determines what law firms will be responsible for filing the foreclosure lawsuits that have now choked our courts through their designation of the law firms that are permitted to institute the foreclosure actions. Now that these firms are under investigation by the Florida Attorney General’s office, you’d think the federal government would step right up and take some action against these firms or at least look into their conduct right? Wrong.

Have a look at the attached article that appears in Mother Jones.

Please read the letters that are attached to the request. Think long and hard about what all this means. I’ve given up hope that our judges and elected leaders have any motivation to address these problems on their own initiative. Our only hope is that journalists will put the massive amount of time and resources that are necessary into researching and telling this story in a way that exposes all the levels of corruption that exist.

I really believe that only the press can save us now. Please support those in our press who are telling this story by commenting and sharing the stories they are telling. Please “share” the stories and links on Facebook and emails so that their editors can see that these issues are of interest to readers.

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Sep

WARNING- LENDERS ARE COMING TO KICK DOWN YOUR DOOR!

By MattWeidner | Weidner

13218Leave a Comment2010-09-19+23%3A58%3A14MattWeidner

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 .

PalmBeachPost

complaintfiledtotal1

policereport

It just sickens me to know what this country has become and it’s only going to get worse.

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Sep

Ohio Attorney General/Texas Attorney General Sue Mortgage Servicers

By MattWeidner | Weidner

13183Leave a Comment2010-09-18+15%3A05%3A48MattWeidner

Some states have powerful, proactive Attorney Generals who aren’t afraid to stand up for consumers and common people. The links below will take to you sites that detail actions the Attorney Generals from Ohio and Texas are taking. These lawsuits could and should be filed by Attorneys General in every state. Our Attorney General is nibbling around the edges, one can only hope that the investigations of the mills will ultimately lead to real charges…..

http://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagnews/release.php?id=3458

http://www.ohioattorneygeneral.gov/Briefing-Room/News-Releases/September-2010/Court-Affirms-Cordrays-Case-Against-Loan-Servicer

http://www.myfloridalegal.com/newsrel.nsf/newsreleases/2BAC1AF2A61BBA398525777B0051BB30

http://myfloridalegal.com/mortgagefraud

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Aug

BREAKING AND ENTERING IS NOT A CRIME!

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Weidner

12463Leave a CommentBREAKING+AND+ENTERING+IS+NOT+A+CRIME%212010-08-25+23%3A57%3A47Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

Not so long ago in this country breaking into another person’s home would clearly have been a crime.

When law enforcement cared. When those we elected to protect us cared. When Judges cared.

But that was long ago. Before the banks, foreclosure mills and Wall Street criminals took over this country and trampled on the rights of any soul who dared cross them or get in their way. Today we live in a much different world. The banks and their agents are emboldened. They fear no government official. They fear no judge. They are restrained by no law.

I have begun collecting terrifying examples of bank terror and will continue to publish the examples. For starters, I want each of you to read the lawsuit I’ve just filed. Read carefully the allegations made in the lawsuit, but most importantly read the report from the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Department. Read the findings of fact. Two thugs broke into a home, moved property around, helped themselves to a beer. The thugs returned and boldly told their victims they would return to terrorize again. Two visitors to our country were terrified. Thousands of dollars in property was stolen. But the Sheriff’s office can seem to find a crime here.

The thing that terrifies me most about the incidents described in this lawsuit is the fact that I have logged dozens of phone calls to various levels of authority within the Charlotte County Sheriff’s Office. I have spoken with street officers, detectives, supervisors, even internal affairs. My calls have been ignored. I’m not sure if I’ve gotten high enough up the chain of command, but I’m going to keep working, keep calling and keep filing lawsuits until this issue gets the attention that it deserves.

Pay attention to the facts in this case and be appalled, but sit tight and stay tuned because as bad as the facts in this case are, I’ve got worse cases and am preparing to file additional cases with even more grotesque facts. If law enforcement, particularly our elected Sheriff will no longer protect us in our homes, who can we count on to protect our families? When one of these lender break ins results in physical harm either in Charlotte County or in some other county across this country, law enforcement cannot stand by and say they were unaware of this phenomena.

complaintfiledtotal

Please share your examples with me. We cannot stand by and allow these fundamental violations of rights to occur. I hope that press picks up on these stories and that our elected officials and judges will wake up serve those they took an oath to protect.

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Aug

Brown Wins $1 Million in Restitution for Victims of Attorney-Backed Foreclosure Rescue Scam

By LH | Foreclosure Blog News, Homeowner Resources, Weidner

12404Leave a Comment2010-08-25+00%3A29%3A31LH

There are good business models and bad business models. It is not automatically true that a large scale operation is running after the money rather than service for you, but be sure to check out their references. Many if not most of these scam operations are being chased off the market with full support of the banking industry. It seems that even though the operations are less than upscale, they nevertheless delayed the foreclosure process and cost the pretender lenders money. Or check them out here with a posting and see what response you get.

2010/08/24 at 1:28 pm submitted by ABBY

CALIFORNIA ATTORNEY GENERAL BROWN NAILS THEM AGAIN!!!!

Brown Wins $1 Million in Restitution for Victims of Attorney-Backed Foreclosure Rescue Scam

LOS ANGELES – Attorney General Edmund G. Brown Jr. today announced a $1.1 million judgment against longtime Los Angeles attorney Mitchell Roth after he conned 2,000 desperate homeowners into paying him thousands of dollars to file “frivolous and phony” lawsuits that didn’t reduce a penny of mortgage debt for a single client.

“Roth promised foreclosure relief through aggressive litigation, but the frivolous and phony lawsuits he filed instead left 2,000 desperate homeowners in even greater debt,” Brown said. “This settlement forces Roth to pay $1.1 million and prohibits him from ever again preying on new victims.”

In 2008, Roth, a seasoned Los Angeles attorney, joined with Nevada-based United First, Inc. and the company’s owner, Paul Noe, to provide foreclosure relief services to homeowners struggling to pay their mortgages. Noe, who was previously convicted of wire fraud and the subject of a 2004 Department of Insurance Cease and Desist Order, operated the company and handled client solicitations, while Roth provided legal services.

Homeowners were told that if they worked with United First and hired Roth to pursue their cases in court, they could lower or eliminate their mortgage debt and save their homes.

United First charged homeowners some $1,800 in up-front fees, plus at least $1,250 each month, and 50 percent of the cash value of any settlement. If a homeowner’s debt was eliminated altogether, the homeowner was required to pay United First 80 percent of the value of the home.

After collecting up-front fees, Roth filed lawsuits on behalf of homeowners, pushing a novel legal argument that a borrower’s loan could be deemed invalid because the mortgages had been sold so many times on Wall Street that the lender could not demonstrate who owned it.

Once the lawsuit was filed, Roth did next to nothing to advance the case and often failed to make required court filings, respond to legal motions, comply with court deadlines or appear at court hearings. Instead, Roth tried to extend the lawsuits as long as possible to collect additional monthly fees from clients.

This approach did not generate a single victory in court and did not lower or eliminate the mortgage debt for a single one of the 2,000 homeowners who hired Roth and United First.

Brown filed suit last July, alleging that Roth, Noe and United First engaged in unfair competition, made untrue and misleading statements and violated California’s credit counseling and foreclosure consultant laws.

The settlement announced today requires Roth to pay $1 million in restitution to defrauded homeowners plus $125,000 in penalties, and prohibits him from ever engaging in similar conduct in the future.

Roth was admitted to the California State Bar in 1977 and resigned in April 2009, after the State Bar ordered his law firm closed.

Brown’s office continues to litigate the case against Noe and United First.

Homeowners who were defrauded by Roth and United First, or victimized by any other foreclosure rescue scam, should contact Brown’s office at 1-800-952-5225 or file a complaint online at: http://www.ag.ca.gov/consumers/general.php

Homeowners can also file a complaint against a lawyer, a legal specialist or a company purporting to operate as a law firm with the State Bar by calling 1-800-843-9053 or visiting http://www.calbar.ca.gov

United First customers who are eligible for a refund will be contacted by mail.

By law, all individuals and businesses offering mortgage-foreclosure consulting, loan modification and foreclosure-assistance services must register with Brown’s office and post a $100,000 bond. It is also illegal for loan modification consultants and businesses to charge up-front fees for their services.

Non-profit housing counselors certified by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development provide free help to homeowners. To find a counselor in your area, call 1-800-569-4287.

Brown has sought court orders to shut down more than 30 fraudulent foreclosure-relief companies and has brought criminal charges and obtained lengthy prison sentences for dozens of deceptive loan modification consultants.

For more information on Brown’s action against loan modification fraud visit: http://ag.ca.gov/loanmod

Copies of Brown’s original complaint, filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court, and the settlement announced today are attached.
# # #

You may view the full account of this posting, including possible attachments, in the News & Alerts section of our website at: http://ag.ca.gov/newsalerts/release.php?id=1979

Filed under: foreclosure

Aug

The Motion Every Judge Should Read (And the one the foreclosure mills hoped would never see the light of day!)

By Matthew D. Weidner, Esq. | Weidner

12073Leave a Comment2010-08-19+11%3A03%3A20Matthew+D.+Weidner%2C+Esq.

Our circuit court judges are under unprecedented pressure from the Florida Legislature who has cut their budgets to the bone while at the same forcing judges to push through the foreclosure cases without the time and the resources they need to do the job properly. This conflict has created fundamental weakness in the most important branch of our government and that weakness is being exploited by the foreclosure mills. This exploitation is characterized by the all too common practice demonstrated by the mills of creating and submitting evidence to the courts that is of questionable authenticity and by engaging in patterns of questionable conduct such as submitting improper Affidavits of Service of Process that would not survive proper judicial scrutiny.

Our judges have struggled to grasp all these issues under the tidal wave of cases that have been dumped in their courtrooms, but the recent announcement that the Florida Attorney General is investigating the four foreclosure mills that are responsible for the majority of foreclosures in Florida demonstrates that these issues are serious and that even if the courts will not address the issues, the state’s top law enforcement offer may be willing to do so.

It’s time to stop looking the other way while the improper practices continue to infect our courtrooms. We all need to help our judges understand the issues that are now being formally investigated by outside officials that have real enforcement powers and authority. As attorneys and members of the Bar we can no longer look the other way and allow an infinitesimally small group of law firms to denigrate the practice of law and diminish our courtrooms in order to serve the interests of the bad actors that caused all this mess in the first place.

We have a duty to our clients and to our judges to bring the investigations and lawsuits to their attention in very clear and direct ways. We have a duty to protect our judges from continuing to process cases which may carry the taint of impropriety based on the very serious investigations that have been announced by the Attorney General’s Office. While I did not include this issue in the motion that appears below, the question I have now is,

If the Attorney General finds that the foreclosure mills have engaged in unfair and deceptive practices, is not every Defendant who was a victim of that conduct entitled to make counter claims in the foreclosure case to raise these claims?

I think they are and I’m next going to amend this motion to include a Motion to Amend Answer and include claims for unfair and deceptive practices in every case where the facts support such claims. The collective response to the unprecedented legislative pressure should not be to continue rewarding improper conduct with rushed through summary judgments and rocket dockets, we should be providing our judges with the facts and case law they need to dismiss the cases that are clogging their dockets and sapping their resources. Allow the lenders to get their documents and cases prepared properly then refile the cases when the are prepared to prosecute cases that will withstand proper judicial scrutiny. Review the motions and the attachments that appear below and ask yourself,

If you were a judge, would you feel comfortable granting judgments that throw your neighbor into the street when that judgment benefits parties you cannot identify and the documents used to support that judgment are questioned by this state’s chief law enforcement officer?

And now, here are the goods:

Judicial Notice of AG Investigations

marshallsubpoena

shapirosubpoena

sternsubpoena

SternClassActionCooper

SternClassActionFigueroa

Tweet this! Share and Enjoy:

Scridb filter

Jul

Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer

By LH | Foreclosure Blog News, Homeowner Resources

11069Leave a Comment2010-07-29+14%3A33%3A16LH

Our good friend “Anonymous” has piped up with more vital information and expressed it more succinctly than I did.

“The senior tranches have largely already been paid and closed. Since the junior tranches are paid only if there is left over current payment – after the senior tranches have been paid. Thus, junior tranches are paid nothing (this is evident in investor lawsuits – damages do not deduct foreclosure recovery). If anything remains today from the toxic mortgage loan securitizations, it is the residual tranche – which has likely been resecuritized into a separate Trust – that is not a current pass-through security – but, rather, synthetically derived from a dismantled original Trust structure. “

Editor’s Note: In other words, if you have a high quality loan wherein you have a high credit score and received relatively good terms, it was in the “senior tranches.” The senior tranches were paid and closed. They were paid from the meager proceeds of the junior tranches, from insurance, credit default swaps etc. Bottom Line: If you got one of those mortgages, it has almost certainly been paid in full. So why are they still collecting your payments? Because they can.

Your obligation has most likely been satisfied long ago without any rights of subrogation. If you are in foreclosure now with one of these loans, the “Trustee” is in actuality out of the picture because the “Trust” was closed out (IF IT EVER LEGALLY EXISTED). All of this leads to the politically incorrect conclusion that people gt their houses for “nothing.” But that is not true.

ALL THE MONEY THAT WAS OWED ON THAT LOAN HAS BEEN PAID. WHY SHOULD ANYONE COLLECT ANYTHING FURTHER?

More comments from “Anonymous”

2010/07/29 at 5:47 am

This is a very important post. I have been aware of cases where the defendant is sent to mediation without first identifying the real creditor. Some here have stated that the real party issue is not relevant because eventually the plaintiff will get his “ducks in a row” and proceed with the foreclosure under the real party name.

Not identifying the real party in court is not only fraud but also deprives the defendant of direct and timely negotiation with the real party true creditor. Thus, damages accrue to the defendant.

Although real party, in my opinion, is the single most important issue, I am not seeing courts enforce discovery to ascertain the real party. Once it can be established that the real party is not before the court, all the produced documents are also subject to question. I have seen cases where the real party is at issue – but most of the cases simply state that the plaintiff does not have standing – without attempting to demonstrate why the plaintiff is not the real party.

Since foreclosure cases most often are indicative of securitization, knowing the chain of sale/assignment in a securitization is crucial. Also, knowing what the “investors” are entitled to is important. Again, while I think this post is very important – i disagree with “there is nothing left to pay the investors who advanced money into a pool from which some mortgages were funded” 1) any investors who indirectly funded a “pool” – did not directly fund mortgages and 2) tranche “investors” – for which there a limited number of tranches – were only entitled to current income pass-through – not foreclosure recovery (which is not current and not passed on to pass-through security investors. (However, the residual tranche is not a pass-through – and is usually held by the servicer – who may -or may not be the current creditor). 3) the Trust is likely dissolved.

The fact that mediation is being conducted without identification of the current creditor – in whose name any modification must be contracted – is simply additional fraud upon the borrower defendant. This fraud is akin to “loan modification” scams that are being currently investigated by some state Department of Justices.

How and why the courts are allowing this to happen – and actually promoting it – is beyond me.

Editor’s Note: Legally this puts us at the horns of a dilemma. If we want to travel the path of “PAID IN FULL” then we are treading on the thin ice of accepting or admitting that the loan was actually legally and correctly assigned and indorsed into the pool, in addition to the usual “free house” talk. If we travel the path of UNSUCCESSFUL ATTEMPTED ASSIGNMENT then we get to the conclusion that the loan is still owned by the originating lender, who was PAID IN FULL at the time of the loan closing, but still is the owner of record. If we travel both paths, we are presenting a highly complex argument that most judges won’t understand. This is why the winners out there are not making big splashes with exotic legal arguments (even though they would be right), the winners are getting down to the details that any Judge would understand — SHOW ME THE TRUST DOCUMENT, SHOW ME THE NOTE, SHOW ME THE ASSIGNMENT, SHOW ME THE INDORSEMENT, SHOW ME THE ACCOUNTING, SHOW ME THE CREDITOR ETC.

MANY THANKS, ANONYMOUS!!!

Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, evidence, expert witness, foreclosure mill, GTC | Honor, HERS, investment banking, Investor, MODIFICATION, Mortgage, Motions, Pleading, securities fraud, Servicer, STATUTES, trustee Tagged: creditor, fraud, mediation, REAL PARTY IN INTEREST

May

Non-judical sale is not exactly a foreclosure

By LH | Foreclosure Blog News, Homeowner Resources

71621 Comment2010-05-08+08%3A34%3A40LH

The problem is that a statute passed for judicial economy is now being used to force the burden of proof onto the borrower in the foreclosure of their own home

I think the main issue in non-judicial states is what does “non-judicial” mean.

I think in your argument you do NOT want to concede that they wish to foreclose. What they want to do is execute on the power of sale in the deed of trust WITHOUT going through the judicial foreclosure process as provided in state statutes.

You must understand that the opposition is seeking to go around normal legal process which requires a foreclosure lawsuit. THAT would require them to make allegations about the obligation, note and mortgage that they cannot make (we are the lender, the defendant owes us money, we are the holder of the note, the note is payable to us, he hasn’t paid, the unpaid balance of the note is xxx etc.) and they would have to prove those allegations before you had to say anything. In addition they would subject to discovery in which you could test their assertions before an evidentiary hearing. That is how lawsuits work.

The power of sale given to the trustee is a hail Mary pass over the requirements of due process. But it allows for you to object.

The question which nobody has asked and nobody has answered, is on the burden of proof, once you object to the sale, why shouldn’t the would-be forecloser be required to plead and prove its case? If the court takes the position that in non-judicial states the private power of sale is to be treated as a judicial event, then that is a denial of due process required by Federal and state constitutions.

The only reason it is allowed, is because it is private and “non-judicial.” The quirk comes in because in practice the homeowner must file suit. Usually the party filing suit must allege facts and prove a prima facie case before the burden shifts to the other side. So the Judge is looking at you to do that when you file to prevent the sale.

Legally, though, your case should be limited to proving that they are trying to sell your property and that you have meritorious defenses. That SHOULD trigger the requirement of re-orienting the parties and making the would-be forecloser file a complaint (lawsuit) for foreclosure.

Then the burden of proof would be properly aligned with the party seeking affirmative relief (i.e., the party who wants to enforce the deed of trust (mortgage), note and obligation) required to file the complaint with all the necessary elements of an action for foreclosure and attach the necessary exhibits.

They don’t want to do that because they don’t have the exhibits and the note is not payable to them and they cannot actually prove standing (which is a jurisdictional question). The problem is that a statute passed for judicial economy is now being used to force the burden of proof onto the borrower in the foreclosure of their own home. This is not being addressed yet but it will be addressed soon.

Filed under: CASES, CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, expert witness, foreclosure, foreclosure mill, Forensic Analysis Workshop, GTC | Honor, HERS, investment banking, Investor, Motion Practice and Discovery, Servicer, STATUTES, trustee, workshop Tagged: BURDEN OF PROOF, judicial event, judicial foreclosure, non-judicial, object to the sale, power of sale, trustee

Apr

Shareholders Sue Goldman, Blankfein Confirming Trusts Do NOT Own the Loans

By LH | Foreclosure Blog News, Homeowner Resources

6826Leave a Comment2010-04-27+17%3A52%3A24LH

Leo II
bgitt47@verizon.net

2010/04/25 at 12:26 am

Editor’s Note: I believe Leo is right. These suits allege that the SPV do not own the loan portfolios. They also allege directly that the Trust Assets included insurance — payments from credit default swaps.

Two revealing lawsuits filed against Goldman-Sachs that I believe further support arguments that most, if not all Subprime securitized Notes that went into default should be considered as satisfied by virtue of default and the ensuing payment to holders of the Credit Default Swaps (Puts) created for each such Note.

And then there’s the issue of TARP funds, ($10 billion of which went to Goldman-Sachs alone), which, along with the CDO payments should have been utilized to compensate the investors who purchased the Notes

All of which, taken as a whole, lends support to the assertion that the Notes are Satisfied..

All that remans is for the Courts to order firms like Goldman-Sachs to distribute the money to the investors, declare satisfaction of the underlying Notes and Order the quiting of the titles securing said Notes.

Agree? Disagree?

http://solari.com/blog/articles/2010/Goldman-Rosinek_v_Blankfein.pdf

http://solari.com/blog/articles/2010/Goldman-Spiegel_v_Blankfein.pdf

Filed under: CASES, CDO, CORRUPTION, Eviction, expert witness, Fannie MAe, foreclosure, foreclosure mill, Forensic Analysis Workshop, GTC | Honor, HERS, investment banking, Investor, MODIFICATION, Mortgage, Motion Practice and Discovery, politics, securities fraud, Securitization Survey, Servicer, STATUTES, trustee, workshop Tagged: Blankfein, credit default swaps, Goldman, insurance, Leo II, Shareholders, SPV, TRUSTS

Mar

Lawsuits Against Pretender Lenders Skyrocket

By LH | Foreclosure Blog News, Homeowner Resources

5255Leave a Comment2010-03-11+17%3A56%3A27LH

In the last five years, the number of foreclosure lawsuits filed in federal court in California has ballooned — like an exploding adjustable-rate mortgage — from only 29 statewide in 2005 to nearly 1,400 last year.

Increasing numbers of Californians are suing lenders to avoid foreclosures

By Tracey Kaplan and Maria J. Ávila López, www.mercurynews.com

Two weeks before their Sunnyvale home was to be auctioned off on the courthouse steps, Sonia Leverman and her sons seized on a desperate David-vs.-Goliath strategy: They sued their lender.

Everything else the Levermans tried had already failed. By turning to the courts, they joined a fast-growing number of fearful and frustrated California home- owners who hope litigation will allow them to hold onto the American dream — maybe at a lower monthly mortgage cost, maybe just for a while longer until the inevitable foreclosure.

In the last five years, the number of foreclosure lawsuits filed in federal court in California has ballooned — like an exploding adjustable-rate mortgage — from only 29 statewide in 2005 to nearly 1,400 last year.

Many such lawsuits also are filed in state courts, which don’t track the numbers or the outcomes.

The striking increase in suits against lenders reflects the difficulty many with underwater mortgages are having in getting loan modifications, either through the government program or the banks themselves.

But some experts say the lawsuits don’t work as well as they did 18 months ago, and never were an easy bet in California.

Even if a lawsuit doesn’t ultimately succeed, it can sometimes significantly delay the loss of a home. Some suits contend the lender reneged on a promise of a loan modification, as in the Levermans’ case. Others argue lenders screwed up the foreclosure process. Among the most frequent claims: During the overheated housing boom, the bank did not properly disclose the terms of the loan, the borrower never really qualified, but got a loan anyhow.

If there are grounds for a lawsuit, “it definitely buys time,” said Hayward attorney Glen L. Moss.

Yet judges are quicker to dismiss cases as they get more familiar with the complex laws, banks are more reluctant to settle them, and the federal court here is the only one in the nation that requires some homeowners to put up a portion of what they borrowed before certain lawsuits can be heard.

Attorneys familiar with the 4-inch-thick set of federal rules on lending also warn that fragile homeowners are easy prey for unscrupulous or ill-informed lawyers. California enacted an emergency law in October preventing attorneys from taking advance fees for loan modifications, but the State Bar is investigating more than 500 lawyers for loan modification fraud.

Some California Democratic legislators are trying to get a law passed that probably would reduce the number of lawsuits by requiring mediation between borrowers and lenders before a foreclosure can proceed.

California has the nation’s fourth-highest foreclosure rate after Florida, Nevada and Arizona. Several other states have passed similar programs, including Nevada. But the bill faces strong opposition from mortgage bankers.

Legal battles

On a street of bland ranch houses just west of Highway 101, the Levermans’ three-bedroom, $655,000 home stands out with its jaunty orange and terra cotta paint job and immaculate yard studded with animal figurines.

“For me, it’s my palace even though it’s old,” said Leverman, who speaks little English.

To make the initial monthly payments of about $2,500, her husband and sons worked long hours as cooks. But in 2008, her husband lost his job and her sons’ hours were cut back, just as the variable-rate mortgage payment shot up to $4,353.

The increase shocked Leverman, who’d signed the English-only documents without understanding the terms. The family then wasted $6,500 on three loan modification “experts” who didn’t accomplish anything.

The last straw was when Litton Loan Servicing refused to grant them a permanent loan modification, claiming their third trial payment was late — even though they had a Western Union receipt showing it arrived on time. An attorney for Litton did not respond to requests for comment.

The Levermans’ frustrating experience is not unique, though banks insist they have modified thousands of loans. The latest data on Obama’s loan modification program does show improvement. But Alan M. White, a professor at Valparaiso University School of Law, who specializes in foreclosures, said tough enforcement action is needed to spur more modifications.

The Levermans finally hired Los Gatos lawyer Wendell J. Jones, who filed suit in state court against Litton, alleging breach of contract. As a result, the family is back on track for a permanent modification, though they still will owe more than the house is now worth. If everything works out, Jones’ services will cost $5,000. “Only when I got involved and filed a lawsuit did the lender come to the table,” Jones said.

But even Jones warns the Levermans’ success may be the exception, not the rule. Many homeowners who’ve filed suit remain in limbo.

Move delayed

To Aaron Liebelt, one of Moss’ clients, that’s enough for now. Liebelt, 36, and his girlfriend, Jessica Taylor, bought their four-bedroom house with a swimming pool in West San Jose in 2006 for $815,000. They made interest-only payments of $3,500 for two years, and were hoping to refinance, until he lost his job at a music store and his recording studio foundered.

Liebelt, who now works from 3 a.m. to 1 p.m. delivering bread, was about to be evicted when he hired Moss. The lender claimed he had defaulted on a repayment plan they negotiated, which the suit claims is not true. Now, the couple and Taylor’s teenage children get to stay in the same house and school district until the matter is litigated — which Moss says could take anywhere from six months to two years. The couple is paying Moss about $3,000 a month.

“What is the worst that could happen — I’ll lose the house?” Liebelt said. “I’m already in that position.”

Filed under: bubble, CDO, CORRUPTION, currency, Eviction, foreclosure, GTC | Honor, Investor, Mortgage, securities fraud Tagged: CALIFORNIA, foreclosure offense, foreclosures, pretender lenders

Will California’s New Attorney General Sue All The Banks for Fraudclosure?

BANK BREAK INS- New York Times- What Will You Do To Stop This Tyranny?

Judge Dismisses 127 Foreclosure Lawsuits For Improper Verification….

BOMBSHELL- MERS v. Azize- Florida’s Sixth Circuit Got Foreclosure Right Before the Crisis

Investor and Institutional Lawsuits Offer Keys to Defending Homeowners in Foreclosure

Is Your Foreclosure Final Judgment Void or Voidable? Rally Saturday November 20, TAMPA

Oops, I lost my summons! Oops, I lost my summons! (Repeat 9,000 times)

LISTEN TO THIS TERRIFING 911 CALL- BANK BREAKING DOWN A DOOR!

Another BOMBSHELL- a HUGE class action lawsuit agiant MERS, GMAC, BAC….and others.

Your Federal Government- The Real Party at Interest in Foreclosure Fraud? (Mother Jones Story)

WARNING- LENDERS ARE COMING TO KICK DOWN YOUR DOOR!

Ohio Attorney General/Texas Attorney General Sue Mortgage Servicers

BREAKING AND ENTERING IS NOT A CRIME!

Brown Wins $1 Million in Restitution for Victims of Attorney-Backed Foreclosure Rescue Scam

The Motion Every Judge Should Read (And the one the foreclosure mills hoped would never see the light of day!)

Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer

MANY THANKS, ANONYMOUS!!!

Non-judical sale is not exactly a foreclosure

Shareholders Sue Goldman, Blankfein Confirming Trusts Do NOT Own the Loans

Lawsuits Against Pretender Lenders Skyrocket

Increasing numbers of Californians are suing lenders to avoid foreclosures

Quick Browse | Pick A Category

Connect with Us Immediately

Daily Dose of Inspiration

Popular Tags & Terms Cloud

Foreclosure News

Need Internet Marketing?