Treasury Seeks Wall Street Input on Overhauling Watchdog

Where can we help with comments on this subject?! Contact the Secretary of Treasury – click HERE. Please maintain decorum.

We’ll achieve more from polite conduct and facts than from shrill resistance attitudes. Remember: “It’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.”

Livinglies's Weblog

By

Jesse Hamilton

July 14, 2017

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-07-14/treasury-is-said-to-seek-wall-street-input-on-overhauling-fsoc

• Lobbyists in private meeting call for weakening super-watchdog
• Trump has ordered Treasury report on rethinking risk panel

A pedestrian walks past the Wall Street subway station near New York Stock Exchange.

Photographer: Michael Nagle/Bloomberg

The Trump administration is letting the financial industry make its case that a super regulator set up to prevent a repeat of the 2008 crisis should be reined in.

At a closed-door meeting in Washington Thursday, lobbying groups for banks, securities firms and banks argued to Treasury Department officials that the Financial Stability Oversight Council should revamp its approach, according to people with direct knowledge of the topics discussed. Industry participants said the council should stop tagging companies as “systemically important,” a label that subjects them to greater scrutiny. The groups also want it to be easier for firms that have been called out as risky to escape the additional…

View original post 403 more words

Another PennyMac Crash! CA Case for Homeowner

Why are the CA courts afraid to publish these decisions? Ridiculous! It’s time to expose the corruption and pitiful slaughtering of our land titles and records.

Click HERE for a copy of the decision.

Livinglies's Weblog

American jurisprudence is clearly still struggling with the fact that in most cases the forecloser either does not exist or does not have any interest in the loans they seek to enforce. In virtually all instances PennyMac is acting in the role of a sham conduit while allowing its name to be used as the front for a nonexistent lender.

Such foreclosers use semantics and legal procedure to create and cover-up the illusion of “ownership” of the debt (the loan) and the illusion of having the rights to enforce the note bestowed by a true creditor. This case opinion is correct in every respect and it conforms with basic black letter law in all 50 states; yet courts still strive to find ways to allow disinterested parties to foreclose.

Get a consult and Chain of Title Analysis! 202-838-6345

https://www.vcita.com/v/lendinglies to schedule CONSULT, leave message or make payments.

THIS ARTICLE IS…

View original post 1,105 more words

FDIC may revive three U.S. bank lawsuits over soured mortgage debt

Justice League

A federal judge granted the FDIC permission to revive lawsuits against Citigroup Inc (>> Citigroup), Bank of New York Mellon Corp (>> Bank of New York Mellon (The)) and U.S. Bancorp (>> US Bancorp) that he had dismissed last September, to recoup more than $695 million of losses on soured mortgage debt that a failed Texas bank once owned.

In a decision made public on Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Andrew Carter in Manhattan said the FDIC could try to show it still had legal standing to sue as the receiver for Austin-based Guaranty Bank, despite having transferred its claims to a “resecuritization trust” when it sold the debt in March 2010.

Read on.

View original post

MERS Lacks Legal Authority and Public Accountability

Excellent overview of a sham concept set to nationalize our land records. It must stop!

Findsen Law

Harvard Amicus Brief on MERS

Some of the best quotes,

• Mortgage servicing companies, banks, courts and government agencies have all expressed astonishment at the extent to which MERS database is inaccurate. (p. 24)
• “Simply put, ‘MERS is the Wikipedia of land registration systems.’ Culhane v. Aurora Loan Services, 826 F. Supp. 2d 352 (D. Mass. 2011) aff’d, 708 F.3d 282 (1st Cir. 2013).” (p. 12)
• Janis Smith, a spokeswoman for Fannie Mae, admitted Fannie Mae kept its own records and that “We would never rely on it [MERS] to find ownership.” Powell and Morgenson,
  supra p. 32. (p. 25)
• Judge Jennifer Bailey, a circuit court judge in Miami stated of 60,000 foreclosures filed in 2009 in her court, “[A]lmost every single one of them… represents a situation where the bank’s position is constantly shifting and changing because they don’t know what the Sam Hill is going on in their files.” Transcript of Hearing on…

View original post 809 more words

Delaware Supreme Court rules Holder must prove it owns Note: Shrewsbury v. The Bank of NY Mellon

Livinglies's Weblog

The Delaware Supreme Court has ruled you must own note and mortgage in order to foreclose — which is what I have been saying for 12 years.  A lot of good that will do the millions of people who lost their homes to parties that did not have ownership of the note and mortgage.  The days of creating the illusion of standing are approaching their end-  but how about the families who were illegally foreclosed by parties who had no standing to do so?

http://www.delbizcourt.com/recent-news/id=1202792240324/Standing-in-Foreclosure-Actions-Requires-Holding-Both-Mortgage-and-Note?mcode=1202615314751&curindex=1&slreturn=20170606142623

In Shrewsbury v. The Bank of New York Mellon, No. 306, 2016 (Del. Apr. 17, 2017), the Delaware Supreme Court ruled that a mortgage assignee must be entitled to enforce the underlying obligation that the mortgage secures in order to foreclose on the mortgage.

The decision enforces that the mortgage holder in a foreclosure action must also prove that it owns the underlying note…

View original post 621 more words

Bank of NY Mellon v. Anderson: Standing must be Established

The truth is surfacing. Maybe we are returning to the Rule of Law – finally.

“Contrary to plaintiff’s contention, the mere attachment of a copy of the note to the verified complaint does not demonstrate that plaintiff had physical possession of the original note when the action was commenced (see generally Deutsche Bank Natl. Trust Co., 142 AD3d at 684-685), and thus is insufficient to establish standing.”

Livinglies's Weblog

In the Bank of N.Y. Mellon v Anderson, the New York Supreme Court Appellate court got it right by ruling that submitting an affidavit to support a motion is insufficient to establish standing when the affiant cannot swear they are familiar with the servicer’s record keeping practices and procedures.
The mere attachment of a copy of a note to the verified complaint also failed to demonstrate that the servicer had physical possession of the note when the action was commenced, and was ruled insufficient to establish standing.

If every court in the United States demanded proof of standing before a suit is allowed to proceed, foreclosures would come to a screeching halt.  It is concerning that the Bank of NY Mellon was able to proceed in the first place, and the decision says a lot about the lower courts abuse of erroneous presumptions and lack of concern for jurisdiction.

__________________________________________________________

View original post 656 more words

NO TRUST ASSETS: In the eye of the storm

Livinglies's Weblog

This is one more nail in the coffin of false securitization: the only assets attributed to apparent “Buyers” were those related to and including servicer advances. By severing the investors from their positions as creditors, the banks were able to create the illusion that they — or their “originators”, brokers, nominees, fronts and sham operators — were the owners of the debt. NONE of the “transfers” of the “loan documents” involved a purchase and sale of a loan. NONE of the original “loan documents” referred to an actual transaction between the homeowner and the originator. That is because at the base of the paper chain was an entity that served only as a conduit for the paperwork and which had nothing to do with the advance of money to or on behalf of any homeowner. The paper trail and the money trail diverged the moment the loan papers were executed.

View original post 428 more words

PROOF OF STANDING REQUIRED: SEFFAR v. RESIDENTIAL CREDIT SOLUTIONS INC

A nonholder in possession, however, cannot rely on possession of the instrument alone as a basis to enforce it․ The transferee does not enjoy the statutorily provided assumption of the right to enforce the instrument that accompanies a negotiated instrument, and so the transferee “must account for possession of the unendorsed instrument by proving the transaction through which the transferee acquired it.”

Livinglies's Weblog

It is NOT enough to ALLEGE standing. They must PROVE it. Judges across the country are making mistakes with this simple concept. Standing to SUE is presumed if you allege (in words or by incorporation of exhibits) that you have it. Possession of the “original note” can be alleged but at trial the foreclosing party must PROVE (not argue) that (1) they have the original note and (2) they have the right to enforce it either because they own it or because they have been authorized by a person owns it or a person who has the right to enforce it. 

Get a consult! 202-838-6345

https://www.vcita.com/v/lendinglies to schedule CONSULT, leave message or make payments.

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.

—————-

In the end we are closing in on the unthinkable: that anyone who was entitled to…

View original post 2,715 more words

Homebuyers lose life savings during wire fraud transaction, sue Wells Fargo, realtor & title company

Wouldn’t surprise me if there was a Bankster patent for this type of scam. Folks, if you are reading this – please understand privacy and complete safety on the Internet does not exist.

Justice League

DENVER –  A Colorado couple, who lost their life savings while trying to buy their dream retirement home, has filed suit against Wells Fargo Bank, Land Title Guarantee Co., Envoy Mortgage Ltd., Kentwood Real Estate Services LLC and realtor Karen Porras, alleging that none of them did enough to protect sensitive financial information.

James and Candace Butcher sold their house in Longmont and were using the proceeds — more than $272,000 — as a down payment on a new home, at 41467 Sunny Farm Circle in Parker.

They said they wanted a place closer to their son and one big enough for grandchildren.

“We were truly excited, when through negotiations, we won the bid,” Candace Butcher said. “Through the entire process, I kept saying, ‘I can’t believe this is going to be our house.’”

Within 24 hours of closing, not only was it not their house, but they lost all…

View original post 4 more words

The Pooling and Servicing Agreement: Why eat just half the enchilada?

Some REMICs do not contain a PSA – they use a Trust Agreement so reading everything is essential. Sad part of these unregulated financial transactions is that many of the controlling and underpinning documents are not required to be filed. Bankruptcy Courts like New Century have ordered files to be destroyed. Why the necessity to destroy a cloud, you might ask? Oh, that’s another good chapter waiting to be written!

Clouded Titles Blog

Securitization Issues — Throughout the trials and tribulations of pouring over thousands of documents, the same issue keeps popping up in my head.  Why are attorneys claiming to rely ONLY on the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the “PSA”) to establish REMIC failure and nothing else?

How many cases have you read in the last two years that there was strict reliance on the use of the PSA to win a foreclosure case?

I have read of very few instances that go into extreme detail in an attempt to educate a judge (unless you’re in one of the “sand states”, which got hit the hardest and well before the rest of the nation caught on), who really didn’t major in securities law (unless you happen to be “seated” somewhere in the Southern District of New York), all the while opposing counsel is objecting to entering the PSA into evidence at trial…

View original post 2,592 more words