The Plaintiff, like so many others, claimed (and the lower Circuit Court penned in the Findings of Fact) it “is now the Holder of the Note.” Of course, there were the usual series of “after-the-fact” robo-signed assignments trying to establish the right to enforce, and an allonge dated “after-the-fact” signed in blank. Even a witness who was basically a computer jockey viewing screen shots with no personal knowledge of who or how the data was entered. But in this case, there is a bit of a twist which, it appears, the Justices were picking up on as they asked astute questions about the procedure and the original (now bankrupt and liquidated) lender, New Century Mortgage Corporation. Continue reading →
What Every Homeowner Needs To Know About the Latest Foreclosure Trends and Developments in American Law in Order To Survive in an Inconsistent Legal System Largely Out of Service Which Treats Like Cases Differently.
It is a natural law of Justice in virtually every legal system in the history of the world that “like cases should be treated alike,” except it seems in the field of foreclosure defense in America where national inconsistency has become the norm.
Thus, for nearly a tumultuous decade following (the continuation of) the Mortgage Crisis of 2008, American Courts have created a record of contradiction, confusion, and uncertainty, ignoring established rules of evidence and even its own case precedents governing other areas of the law, while often pompously looking the other way in the tradition of Pontius Palate, routinely favoring lenders, often misusing the doctrine of stare decisis to protect previously egregiously mistaken case precedents. Continue reading →
Foreclosure Workshop #19: Bank of America v. Reyes-Toledo, A Case Study on How To Get Appellate Courts To Ask the Correct Questions
For too long homeowners and their counsel have allowed themselves in court to be drawn into and sidetracked by mainly esoteric and artificial, unsuccessful arguments about REMIC tax structures, multi-hat robosigners, and invisible securitized trusts — without getting to the heart of the most important foreclosure defense issues in court.
This Sunday we are airing on The Foreclosure Hour an oral argument that took place on certiorari before the Hawaii Supreme Court on August 18, 2016, heard by five Justices, each intelligent, each free from Big Bank influences, who are beginning to ask the correct questions. Continue reading →
Attorney James “Randy” Ackley appeared on the Neil Garfield Radio Show. The show was a fascinating discussion about banks creating the illusion of standing when a bank is unable to demonstrate they have the right to foreclose.
Neil and Randy addressed why the courts were allowing loan servicers to present evidence that was hearsay, often fraudulent and did not comply with the rules of evidence. Ackley stated that, “The court is allowing evidence to be introduced that would not be admitted in any other type of case.” The discussion brought up the fact that courts are making erroneous presumptions in favor of the banks despite the fact that there is now a public record of banks fabricating evidence, robosigning documents, false notarizations and bank employees testifying under oath about facts they know nothing about.
You may not like this movie. Wolf of Wall Street may be too vulgar. But if you are still invested in Wall Street there must be some vulgar demon or wannabe rich guy inside you that is too delusional to get out.
It’s no wonder why homeowners can’t get a fair shake in court because it appears the delusional sit above, behind and on the bench.
“Mark Hanna: We don’t create shit, we don’t build anything. Jordan Belfort: No. Mark Hanna: So if you got a client who brought stock at eight, and it now sits at sixteen, and he’s all f**king happy, he wants to cash it and liquidate and take his f**king money and run home. You don’t let him do that. Jordan Belfort: Okay. Mark Hanna:Cause that would make it real.
We see all sorts of cases in foreclosure defense and just as many judicial personalities… goofy decisions, irresponsible and / or clueless judges but this one takes the cake! You would think that if you’re going to have your case heard by a trial judge – that he would be required to have some knowledge on the subject, right? Apparently, not in Hawaii’s Second Circuit Court.
A few years ago it appeared that many judges were just not up to speed on the foreclosure scheme, but lately it seems like there has to be a higher ilk that commands lower court to squash the homeowner and if they can afford to appeal, maybe then they’ll be worthy of some justice. Otherwise, presented with the evidence, acknowledging the bad paperwork and still ruling against the homeowner would be crazy or corrupt… or maybe both. This appears to be a case that would certainly seem to fit that synopsis. Continue reading →
Will The California Supreme Court Restore The Evidentiary Due Process Rights Of American Homeowners, Finally Opening Up For Judicial Inspection The Underground Securitized Trust Banking System in the United States, When It Decides The Glaski, Yvanova, Keshtgar and Mendoza Appeals Pending Before It? Don’t MissThis One!
THE FORECLOSURE HOUR
Sundays: 3 pm (HST) / 5 pm (PST) & 8 pm (EST) KHVH Radio Honolulu, Hawaii and on the Internet
Call toll free: (888) 565-8383
The topic for the Sunday, March 7th show: Garywill address the most important question now before the entire foreclosure defense and securitized trust banking communities in the past fifteen years: Continue reading →
It’s just an observation, but it certainly appears that foreclosure judges have been given orders to squash homeowners like a bug at the lower court level and if they can afford to appeal – maybe, just maybe, they might get some fair and balanced justice. The process so far has been highly unbalanced. Whether foreclosure judges are just not competent enough to understand the securitization, rehypothecation and securities scheme, or whether they’ve been told by higher-ups that if they don’t rule against homeowners all their pensions will be lost or the economy will crash – it’s just a bizarre and pathetic state of mind. Continue reading →
This is the week to call in and discuss, air your observations, vent your frustrations and concerns of the foreclosure court judges’ actions when they are faced with tons of fraud and still rule in favor of the bank.
Big banks hold great sway in Washington these days, far more than troubled homeowners do. But outside the Beltway, many people remain caught in the maw of the financial giants, which is why it is heartening when some judges step into the fray.
Consider two opinions involving Wells Fargo, a bank that enjoys a somewhat better reputation than many of its peers. On Monday, a judge in a state court in Missouri ordered Wells to pay over $3 million in punitive damages and other costs for abusing a borrower. Then, on Thursday, a judge in Federal Bankruptcy Court in suburban New York ruled on behalf of another borrower, concluding that there was substantial evidence Wells Fargo forged documents when it foreclosed on a property. Continue reading →