[UNREGULATED] DERIVATIVE COMPLAINT – Blackrock, Pimco Sue U.S. Bank Over Trustee Roles

By Sydney Sullivan

The main focus on The Foreclosure Hour this week, Blackrock & PIMCO, et al v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, was so powerful it deserves to be highlighted. As usual legal protocol, the Plaintiffs’ claims are accepted by the court to be true. For example, the next move for the Defendant might be to file a motion to dismiss, a court must accept all well-pleaded facts as true, viewing the facts in the light most favorable to the plaintiff.

WARNING: The contents of this complaint is likely to make certain foreclosure judges with hefty Plaintiff hedge funds preferred shares in their investment portfolios extremely nauseous.

Plaintiffs Blackrock & PIMCO and a multitude of subsidiaries, affiliates, associates, closely related and closely held companies for each sued U.S. BANK NATIONAL  ASSOCIATION for BREACH OF CONTRACT; VIOLATION OF THE TRUST INDENTURE ACT OF 1939; BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTY; BREACH OF DUTY OF INDEPENDENCE; AND NEGLIGENCE. 

Advertisements

The Rise and Fall of Securitized Trusts: Eleven Future Strategies To Dismantle Them in Their Retreat

WELCOME TO THE FORECLOSURE HOUR

Your weekly national foreclosure talk show.
Listen in. Call in. Make your voice heard.

Your Host: Attorney Gary Victor Dubin
with
Co-Host:  Former Hawaii Governor John D. Waihee 

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.

Paragraph 22, The Notice of Default and Right To Cure: How To Use This Most Overlooked Foreclosure Defense To Defeat Summary Judgment and Win at Trial

WELCOME TO THE FORECLOSURE HOUR

Your weekly national foreclosure talk show.
Listen in. Call in. Make your voice heard.

Your Host: Attorney Gary Victor Dubin
with
Co-Host:  Former Hawaii Governor John D. Waihee 

(Foreclosure Workshop #16: Rebroadcast from July 17, 2016)

This important broadcast, first exclusively airing on The Foreclosure Hour on July 17, 2016, is being repeated because homeowners are still largely under-using this powerful weapon against foreclosure, given the sloppiness and dishonesty of loan servicers, although it is available in virtually every mortgage and deed of trust situation.

John Waihee and I are pleased to have heard from many of our listeners that since that first

Does a Different Statute of Limitations Apply to the Enforcement of Mortgages than to the Enforcement of Notes?

WELCOME TO THE FORECLOSURE HOUR

Your weekly national foreclosure talk show.
Listen in. Call in. Make your voice heard.

Rebroadcast of October 15, 2017 – Gary Dubin
Co-Host: John Waihee
Foreclosure Workshop #48:
Kipuhulu Sugar Co. v. Nakila — Does a Different Statute of Limitations
Apply to the Enforcement of Mortgages than to the Enforcement of Notes?

“It’s the Rules of Evidence — Stupid” (Part Two): 10 More Ways To Avoid Being Blindsided by Dishonest Foreclosure Attorneys

WELCOME TO THE FORECLOSURE HOUR

Your weekly national foreclosure talk show.
Listen in. Call in. Make your voice heard.

Your Host: Attorney Gary Victor Dubin
with
Co-Host:  Former Hawaii Governor John D. Waihee 

For decades State and Federal Courts throughout the United States have been robotically applying one set of evidence rules to foreclosure cases and another set of evidence rules to all other civil cases.

Those who have been listening to our radio show know why, because the Courts until recently have applied the traditional mortgage lending model of the neighborhood banker, oblivious to how the hidden secondary securitized trust banking system works.

It feels like State and Federal Legislators don’t have a Clue about what real-life Americans Face Every Day

By Sydney Sullivan

The Hawaii legislature in 2018 started off wanting to make it a “Felony” if you rented a room in your home short term without the required licensing. Most folks are all for the necessary permit and, of course, paying the taxes. But making a vacation rental violation a felony – well, that went a bit too far.

Sometimes it feels like state and federal legislators don’t have a clue about what real-life Americans face every day. Legislators have always had a paycheck, even during the 2008 meltdown. While many folks were losing their homes, banks offered sweet refinance and payoff deals to legislators all over the country. Average homeowners couldn’t get a refinance or modification from 2008 through 2012 because the banks told them to miss 3 payments to qualify for HAMP and then denied homeowners the opportunity to reinstate their loan – because they were unknowingly in DEFAULT.

Congratulations, You Defeated Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, But Do You Know The Ten Things You Need To Do Next?

Sunday, April 8, 2018 – 3 PM HST
Upcoming Discussion for Sunday’s THE FORECLOSURE HOUR
Sundays: 3 pm (HST) Click HERE to listen.

Homeowners in growing numbers lately, even pro se, have suddenly been defeating summary judgment in foreclosure proceedings or securing appellate reversals of prior summary judgments remanded for trial.

As our listeners know, there are many foolproof ways of challenging the validity of default notices, general loan ledgers, and ownership of promissory notes at filing inception, which we have addressed on prior shows, one or more usually sufficient to defeat summary judgments once you know how easily it can be done, depending of course always on how knowledgeable your foreclosure Judge is.

Oh No! Santa May Have To Cancel Christmas!

On the Foreclosure Hour broadcast last Sunday on Honolulu’s KHVH radio, Host and top-rated Foreclosure Defense Attorney, Gary Dubin, received a call from the North Pole. It was from Santa Claus!

It appears Santa may be the victim of a wrongful foreclosure.

Santa told Mr. Dubin that he received a notice from the Bank of the North Pole that there had been a foreclosure and the bank was evicting the Claus family from their 200-year-old home.

Santa sounded quite panicked because the notice said that the bank would be changing the locks at noon on December 25th… on Christmas Day!  Santa didn’t know at this point whether he could leave the North Pole on Christmas Eve to deliver presents and stated he might have to cancel Christmas. Santa pleaded with Gary Dubin for help.

Listen here to the phone call from Santa Claus on the Foreclosure Hour.

A Year-End Special: Firsthand Comments and Experiences of Our Listeners Battling Foreclosures Nationwide

A Year-End Special: Firsthand Comments and Experiences of Our Listeners Battling Foreclosures Nationwide

This Sunday’s Show will air in Hawaii at 2:00 p.m. (HST) instead 3:00 p.m., its otherwise regular time. Honolulu KHVH Radio & Internet. The Foreclosure Hour

 

John and I receive thousands of letters, emails, and voice mail messages annually from our listeners from just about every State and some foreign countries, detailing their personal experiences trying to fend off foreclosures and evictions.

Time limitations naturally permit us to personally respond to only a few.

We thought that we would, therefore, start a new tradition by reading some of those experiences on our year-end show(s) enabling us to respond in that way to more inquiries.

Special Seventh Year Anniversary of The Foreclosure Hour, Sunday October 22, 2017 – 3 PM HST

Wells Fargo Bank v. Erum — When Is a “Notice of Default” a Notice of Default and When Is It Not?

Nationstar Mortgage v. Akepa Properties — When Is a Foreclosing Plaintiff’s “Lack of Standing” a Jurisdictional Defect and When Is It Not?
———————
For too long most of our courts have cavalierly discriminated against homeowners by consciously or otherwise going out of their way to protect foreclosing plaintiffs, applying legal doctrines against mortgagors differently than in other areas of the law.