The Big Lie.

It’s time for the foreclosure defense arguments to evolve. These contracts are not traditional mortgages. They are, and continue to be, securities transactions without any disclosure to homeowners. Secreted securitization is bad enough; however, hidden rehypothecation, not only from the homeowners but also the courts, is a process of wiping out our national land records and title system – an unprecedented destruction of our liberty.

Banks now want to split the mortgage and wait 20 years until the original contracts become due – so they can assert foreclosure on the property (the securities transaction) while all along risking the collateral in rehypothecation deals. A scheme where they continue to rack up debt with other people’s assets.

Now is the time to put an end to the misery of these disingenuous contracts. They were more than mutual mistake – they were frauds upon the America taxpayers, shareholders and homeowners.

Deadly Clear

Can't cheat an honest manIf you are asking yourself ‘why are judges ruling against homeowners when they know the banks scammed them?’ Then you need to understand a judge’s most basic insight into the human condition is that it is impossible to con an honest man.* It is larceny lurking in the soul of its victim that is preyed upon. What does that mean?

The mortgage deals were too good to be true – but the homeowners believed it to be the truth… because they wanted it to be and it all boils down to making “easy”  M-O-N-E-Y.

View original post 2,021 more words

Advertisements

NY Monroe Case: Default entered against homeowner — CASE DISMISSED on Standing — US Bank Never refiled.

Wow!

Livinglies's Weblog

multiple choice robo-pleading

NO PLEADING: HOMEOWNER WON ANYWAY

I have held off on discussing this case until some time passed. As far as I now know US Bank, like several cases I won, has not refiled for foreclosure. There is a good reason for that. US Bank is not the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff is named as a REMIC Trust, for which the attorneys claim that US Bank is the Trustee.

As such the Plaintiff does not own nor have any interest in the loan either as owner or servicer. Hence the named trustee (U.S. Bank) is named but it has nothing to do since the trust is nonexistent and in all events no attempt has ever been made to entrust the subject mortgage into the fiduciary hands of U.S Bank.

And THAT is because the only party with an equitable interest in the debt is a group of investors whose money…

View original post 1,636 more words