A Pennsylvania federal judge Tuesday granted class certification to deed recorders in Pennsylvania who allege Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. violated state law by failing to properly record mortgage assignments and pay recording fees. This means Pennsylvania may proceed with a class action against the MERS Blur Gang.
U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner GRANTED lead plaintiff Nancy J. Becker’s motion for class certification, finding that the deed recorders for 67 Pennsylvania counties allege that “MERS” (which one!?) compromised public records by creating a separate system for members to record mortgage assignments. See the ORDER HERE.
For nearly 20 years, in particularly the last 10 years, the courts, foreclosure defense attorneys, homeowners and politicians have been bamboozled by the blur and use of “MERS” – the service mark for the MERS® eRegistry system owned and operated now by MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.
Hopefully, Nancy J. Becker realizes the extent of the MERS Blur and that the Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. in over 71 million mortgages is a separate and distinct corporation and – is NOT the eRegistry or the membership.
The eRegistry and the membership belong to MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. While MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. is the parent company for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (which MERSCORP created in 1999) – they are separate and distinct corporations… and MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. is NOT in the mortgages. The line-up of same-name companies and name changes has been an artful dodge in disguising the true purpose and nature of the “Nominee” for the hundreds of pre-tender lenders. Click and read the DC MERS Blur post.
The Language of Real Estate by John W. Reilly (available on AbeBooks.com) defines “nominee” on page 277 as:
“One designated to act for another as a representative in a limited sense. A nominee corporation is sometimes used to purchase real property when principals do not wish to be known.” [Ain’t that the truth?! DC Ed] “Care should be taken in structuring a purchase through the nominee corporation so that there are no adverse tax consequences, such as double taxation to the nominee corporation and then to the shareholders.
The term nominee is not a synonym for assignee. Especially if the purchase is based on seller carryback financing, the real buyer may not be able to get specific performance of the sales contract to the nominee on the grounds that there is no real mutuality of agreement and by reason of indefiniteness. Nominee status is simply a name substitution-no legal rights are transferred. On the other hand, assignee status is a substitution of legal rights. Therefore, in most cases use of the word assignee rather than nominee will better achieve the parties’ intended result of effectively transferring legal rights to the ultimate purchaser.
The nominee form is often used by a real estate syndicator who is the buyer but not the ultimate purchaser. It is also used in a Section 1031 exchange situation for acquiring the replacement property.
The offer should always identify the offeror; that is, neither the phrases buyer nor nominee nor buyer nor assignee should be used in the deposit receipt portion of the offer. Otherwise, the named buyer could simply walk away from the deal and tell the seller to look to the nominee for recovery. Most courts would thus rule the contract illusory and unenforceable. (see assignment, straw man)”
A section under “Straw man” states (and we’ll have to contact John Reilly for this case law):
“a federal court has held that if the nominee misrepresents the identity of his or her principal, with knowledge that the seller would not have negotiated if he or she were in possession of the true facts, the seller may set aside the transaction.”
Not much doubt that there was a bit of misrepresentation from the time that the 1003 Applications were entered into the originator’s computer that seamlessly flowed into the data storage center and into the underwriter (investment bank).
In any case, Nancy J. Becker is hero of the year so far. Hurray for the Pennsylvania County Recorders. Let us know if you need volunteers to help sort through the files. There are hundreds of us reviewing data and we know what fraudulent MERS Blur documents look like. And certainly God Bless the Honorable Chief Judge J. Curtis Joyner.
Surely, somebody in Pennsylvania will see this post and contact the county recorders – just to make sure that the know these are separate and distinct corporations and that all those assignments signed by the staffs of the membership of the MERS® eRegistry – are not employees or “members” of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc.?!