Aug
01

Analysis and Stories of Quiet Title Action

And an upcoming book too which I can’t wait to buy and read. I have always believed that quiet title actions are the key to this whole mess — basic  black letter law applied fairly and consistently with the law of contracts, the law of property, and the recording laws of each state. It helps to be able to know more than your opponent when it comes to the securitization of your loan. This is a good read.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by Dave Krieger

Today, July 30, 2010, 13 hours ago | Dave Krieger
Avirani and Indigo …

I have been working on a book about this whole mess for quite some
time and it is about to be published. The book presents several angles
on attacking the lenders. Your takes on WITHOUT RECOURSE are a
blessing, since you are citing case law.

All of these posts (pertaining to anonymous) do come with a caveat.
Bear in mind when you post that the banks are reading this blog too. I
happen to know of a few law firms right now (foreclosure mills) that
read this blog on a daily basis. I also know of a few judges that are
reading this blog as well. All of this I know through direct contact
with clients, as well as assisting their attorneys as a paralegal with
case work.

RE: UCC … every case is state specific. You can’t quote the federal
UCC because the states have adopted it into their own versions and
altered it to please the political machinery. Max Gardner told me
this. In my research for the book, I have talked to hordes of
attorneys about this stuff and they are very candid when they say that
these foreclosure mills, all part of the grand scheme, are fully
briefed by the banking community as to how to answer these suits and
what they can and cannot get away with. The mavericks that tend to
become arrogant (like Stern) get caught bringing fraud on the court.
Aside from that, the individual attorneys I have spoken with admit
that they do not have the resources to share information as readily as
the foreclosure mill networks do. This is why we have a problem.
Attorneys have egos and the more successful ones know that if an
outside source brings them something credible that sounds plausible
enough to win with then there’s a chance the homeowner is going to get
results.

Seemingly expected … not all of the stuff I share with the hosts of
this blog get shared with the community. When you know that the “other
side” is watching what homeowners are posting on this and other
related blogs, you will find bits and pieces of interjections that are
designed to sway the reader or as in a court case, “get them off
point”. The best way for a defendant lender to win is to get the
Plaintiff homeowner off point, to where the plaintiff goes off on
serious, unproven, unchartered, unsupported (without case law)
conspiracy theories that have no merit because they are just that,
theories.
This is true … your allegations of disinterested counter parties
lodging false information on these blogs has merit.
One can only verify through (1) research; and (2) discovery.

This is why I wrote my book on quiet title actions (along with
everything else in the kitchen sink). In order to weaken the other
side, thousands of lawsuits a week are going to have to get filed,
because there are NOT enough foreclosure mills to defend them. True,
the court system will be clogged like a sewer with these actions.
True, a lot of these banks will typically get their attorneys to
remove the case to federal court, thinking they can get a slam dunk on
diversity jurisdiction (multiple defendants from other states makes in
federal according to their rationale) so they can get a 12(b)(6)
ruling. This is why the entire cause must be centered around quieting
title.

Instead of going after all of these counts, as I have seen in the
past, take only the quiet title as your lead cause and build your case
using key points (not as counts, but as predicators) … this is what I
have seen the good attorneys do in their pleadings … and believe me …
these class actions inure to the benefit of the attorneys that file
them and because of the class, only one law firm needs to take it on.
If you’ve got thousands of homeowners filing quiet title suits in
state court (sticking to state statutes) the lenders do not know how
to react. They usually are in the driver’s seat, foreclosing on the
homeowners. They have a scheme for that. They have a tested
methodology that has worked up to a point. They know what they can get
away with … at least up until now. You will notice that the suits that
are winning are individually filed or individually defended.

If you do not have the Federman decision … I would be happy to send it
to you, as it doesn’t seem to be posted on here. The last paragraph of
the order invites Bank of America and MERS to come forward and produce
documentation to prove agency. Hon. Arthur Federman is a very smart
and highly regarded bankruptcy judge. It’s just too bad that people
don’t read his decisions BEFORE filing bankruptcy. (I sent the Order
to Neil but I haven’t seen any reference to it being posted on here
yet. hint hint)

The banks either (1) can’t produce the note; or (2) tie themselves in
some way through contract to prove agency. I write about that in my
book. These flaws are NOT hard to prove. I have talked to attorneys
who say that the banks’ attorneys come into court with a pomposity
that reeks when they walk in the door. They are not expecting any
attorney to be able to wade through the gobbledygook of paperwork and
arguments they present, because generally, the homeowner has hired a
lawyer that doesn’t know his a** from a hole in the ground. (Neil is
right on that point.)

In quiet title actions, supporting state case law is very relevant,
because the judges’ law clerks can research it and apply it to your
case. If you start putting in federal questions, you give the other
side cause celebre to remove it to federal and slam dunk you. Quiet
title actions are a state right and no federal judge can quiet title
to property sitting in state jurisdiction. The filings are in the
county recorder’s offices (and I seriously doubt that 99.9% of all
borrowers signing the Deed of Trust even knew what the hell they were
signing).

The theories of who loaned who credit and who got paid first and who
got screwed second is NOT the crux of your case. It’s the original
documentation that created the fraud and the subsequent filings in the
county courthouse that become part of your quiet title action. You
see, most states declare in statute that as long as you retain
possession at the time you file a quiet title suit, you can move
forward, even if you are in foreclosure. Some states even allow quiet
title actions to be filed POST FORECLOSURE, POST EVICTION! Again, this
is state specific, where federal law and rules cannot be applied. This
I know from research. I cannot give this out as legal advice
obviously.

Blogs are great sharing tools provided the information being shared is
credible and can be verified.

The lenders’ foreclosure mills shrink up like a man with erectile
dysfunction when placed under this kind of stress, because of the
burden of proof is virtually split between the Plaintiff, who makes
allegations supported by case law and the Defendant lender that has to
tie all of the ends together. Once the quiet title action is filed the
lender can’t go back in and record documentation after the fact to
perfect their security interest … they have to bring it into open
court, where you can impeach it. I have two successful quiet title
actions under my belt personally, so I know how they work.

I also happen to know what the “four corners” rule/doctrine is. It’s
the entire content of the page taken as a whole versus the specifics
contained therein. This is very useful in wrongful foreclosure
actions. Couple a wrongful foreclosure action with quiet title … and
then find your state statute that makes it a state jail felony to file
such fraud with the county court clerks/recorders/register of deeds …
bring the local county recorder and the DA into your case; show them
the docs; show them where they are suspect; get them on your side; the
judges ruling on your cases are more likely to see reason because you
have the county working with you to stomp out fraud. Even as a pro se
Plaintiff (which I shudder to think could pull this off, but could) it
would lend a lot of credibility to your case if you have outside
sources with credibility jumping into the fray. This is how County
entities that record documents, such as deeds of trust, become aware
as to WHY they are being deprived of income because of MERS. … and let
me tell you here and now MERS ain’t no Viagra. If you look at your
original deeds of trust and see who the players are, you will figure
out WHY the whole thing is a fraud, without me having to get on here
and tip my research to the banks who are wondering the same thing.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by gwen caranchini

Today, July 30, 2010, 13 hours ago | gwen caranchini
This is a great post from Dave who I am using myself to help me in my
pro se case–I am a former trial attorney of some 30 yeasr in civil
rights cases in Fed and State Courts so “pro se” for me is a bit
different. Dave is always right on with his case law and his theories.
The def are attempting to remove my quiet title action to fed ct and I
am objecting. I have also filed a complaint with the FBI alleging the
fraud in the HAMP program based upon what is going in in my case and
the fraud in the MERS filings which when you look at all the docs at
the courthouse TOGETHER the fraud becomes clear in several different
ways. Dave is the brightest paralegal I have ever met and should be a
lawyer. I have never had one thing he sent me prove to be wrong–this
guy has also got the common sense approach to this and is not out
there with legal theories that are hard to prove. He knows too what
dis we need. You all would do well to listen to him, get his posts and
use his services.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by gwen caranchini

Today, July 30, 2010, 11 hours ago | gwen caranchini
Stupendous Man–the case Dave is referring to is “In Re Box” decided
June 3 before Arthur Federman in the United States Bankruptcy Court
for the Western District of Missouri. I sent dave that case. It is a
wonderful decision, especially the last page. A bit of an update on
that case as I spoke to the Trustee’s office as a followup. Apparently
BAC continues to ask to be heard at creditor’s meetings on this matter
even after relief from stay was denied BAC. The trustee is refusing to
acknowledge BAC has a position at the creditor’s meeting because it
has not proved it holds the note in question as Judge Federman found.
The last page of Federman’s decision told BAC that when they had the
note or claimed to have the note they could ask for an evidentiary
hearing that showed they had the note and could establish agency for
being able to seek foreclosure on the note. To date, some 7 weeks
later, they have yet to do so and given that the Trustee continues to
deny them the right to speak at creditor’s meetings.

Comment on Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer by Dave Krieger

Today, July 30, 2010, 11 hours ago | Dave Krieger
The basic quiet title actions follow to form and purpose. You use
whatever basis for your claim as necessary. There are a lot of
templates you can use out there. Many attorneys use ProDoc which have
state specific stuff in it. If you look at cases that are specific to
your cause and you go to the law library to look them up … find cases
that are specific to your area or where someone has filed pleadings in
a court near you. Then go to that court with the case # and get a copy
of the pleadings directly from the case file. You can then see how it
was formatted. Before you pay for pleadings though, make sure the
outcome was positive via the case cite. No sense pulling case
pleadings that were incorrectly plead. The case cite itself will tell
you whether or not the case was successful in the case of the
homeowner. My two quiet title actions were against a defunct
corporation in Arkansas over resort property I acquired from the
state. They did not challenge, thus I was awarded. I didn’t have to
prove fraud. This is part of how you make money on tax deed sales, by
quieting title BEFORE you sell. Since I invest in real estate, quiet
title actions have been a particular interest of mine for some time.


Filed under: foreclosure
Jul
29

Mass Extinction of Pools Becomes Clearer

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”

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