WELCOME TO THE FORECLOSURE HOUR
Your weekly national foreclosure talk show.
Listen in. Call in. Make your voice heard.
At first, securitized trusts received obedient kowtowing from the American Judiciary, unwittingly deceived by, if nothing else, their long impressive titles including in their names the names of otherwise past respected financial institutions supposedly acting as their trustees.
And when securitized trusts, starting with the mortgage crisis of 2008, began their unending wave of foreclosures, they did so exclusively as mortgagees, since state foreclosure laws have always been written to exclusively authorize foreclosures on traditional mortgages only and not in favor of the holders of promissory notes.
While mortgagors, for instance, in foreclosure cases continued to argue in court “show me the note,” attorneys for the securitized trusts continued to refuse to discuss the whereabouts or the ownership of promissory notes.
But, thanks initially to the groundbreaking lawyering of a few Florida attorneys taking the oral depositions of robo-signers of mortgage assignments, the foreclosure strategy of securitized trusts came under increased scrutiny and gradually inconsistently switched to “here is the note,” downplaying any need to discuss the ownership of mortgages, some even recently arguing in court that even if the chain of the ownership of a mortgage was broken and uncertain, it supposedly does not any longer matter as “the mortgage follows the note.”
Recently, however, that strategy has also been failing, as the ownership and possession of the note and the right to foreclosure based on ownership of the note have come under increased scrutiny in the majority of State Court, mortgagors challenging the standing of securitized trusts.
In Hawaii, for instance, my law firm has won appellate reversals in 11 “standing” appeals in the past 9 weeks, pretender lenders being unable to prove the right to foreclosure at the time the foreclosure complaint was filed, and appellate courts in other jurisdictions such as California and Florida have similarly been reversing dismissals and summary judgments due to unproven standing to foreclose.
On today’s show as time permits, John and I examine some of those appellate cases, suggest that the reign of securitized trusts in American Courts is ending, and further discuss eleven future strategies for dismantling them in their retreat, including:
- Suing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac for fraud on our courts.
- Suing securitized trusts for securities law violations.
- Replacing federally backed mortgage funding with private sector Homeowners Adjustable Trusts (HAT).
- Suing for reparations for falsely foreclosed homeowners.
- Reorganizing State recording offices to staff them with attorneys by passage of the Mortgage Integrity Act (MIA).
- Reorganizing State Judiciaries to create emergency response teams to deal with mortgage and deed of trust foreclosures.
- Securing media attention to the realities and abuses of securitized trusts and their hidden underground banking system.
- Encouraging political leadership to confront foreclosures and related homeowner issues.
- Organizing homeowners as a united force helping each other in the Homeowners SuperPAC (HPac).
- Stimulating support from allied interest groups, such as realtors, State rights advocates, small banks.
- Challenging The Rule Ritual Litigation slogans of securitized trust attorneys, such as “the mortgage follows the note” and the “free house” hobgoblin.
Gary Victor Dubin
Dubin Law Offices
Suite 3100, Harbor Court
55 Merchant Street
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Office: (808) 537-2300
Cellular: (808) 392-9191
Facsimile: (808) 523-7733
Licensed in California and Hawaii