Wrongful Foreclosure Compensation

The following is not designed as lawful counsel, it is a risky preliminary/tentative evaluation based on rare details. It indicates that the PRESS and immunity bar needs to take appropriate steps swiftly to aware affected individuals of property foreclosed of possible privileges –and computer file safety claims. There is much research needed to understand all the consequences. OCC is not group at this point and will not offer even duplicates of the type for research. This rejection in itself should offer a base for required expansion of the processing time frame. Is this another HAMP-like setup?
The U.S. Office of Comptroller of Forex (“OCC”) declared on Nov 1, 2011 that it has achieved a Approval Contract with the below-listed home mortgage servicers—some of which are well-known large financial institutions and investment banks–referred to as, “Independent Foreclosure Review” which allows property foreclosed affected individuals to make a “Request for Review”. You have got until Apr 30, 2012 to computer file your Ask for for Evaluation with the OCC. See FAQ about the new review process published on OCC website.
Other saying yes servicers are not financial institutions but are generally debt collectors that have bought selection privileges from lenders-including supposed “securitization trusts” that were used to pool area loans and re-sell passions in the combined loans to traders such as retirement living resources. The main individuals that for the servicers saying yes to the Approval Purchase were: use of faulty certification to support property foreclosed problems in nation legal courts [e.g. badly notarized “Assignments of Mortgage”, claims of amounts due], and property foreclosed evictions performed on property owners who were trying to work out home mortgage variations under the Obama HAMP system. The Approval Contract needs that saying yes servicers deliver characters to their affected individuals and repairs a timeline for making the claims of Apr 30, 2012. Per the OCC FAQ,
“Borrowers may also visit http://www.IndependentForeclosureReview.com for more details about the review and declare process. Support with the type and solutions to questions about the process are available at 1-888-952-9105, Thursday through Sunday from 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. (ET) and Sunday from 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. (ET).
Requests for review must be obtained by Apr 30, 2012.”
Unfortunately not all servicers joined into the consent agreement. For those servicers, offended property owners either can use the same recommendations as the OCC accept to request agreement willingly by the servicers, and computer file a duplicate of the same declare details with the Government Business Percentage and the Oh Lawyer Common Customer Security Division— or use more complicated lawful solutions in nation courts—including problems to set aside the home foreclosures and recover possession in the captured houses by “Quiet Title” activities. Any of these activities can be performed by the property owners themselves independently or in categories, through lawful aid, or through lawful professionals.
It seems to be that non-consents should be suffering from the same declare processes—through the Government Business Percentage and condition Attorneys general Customer protection. Unconditionally there is refusal of equivalent protection missing a condition right increasing out of the same information. Thus if a servicing company used LPS/DOCX –MERS contrivances and was controlled by Government Source and OCC, then a sufferer is provided privileges. But under this consent administration system, if an not controlled servicing company [the toughest kind] used the identical process to misuse property owners and the lawful system—that house owner MUST have equivalent privileges –but under a different location. The claims should now be part of condition law as if the consenters—particularly MERS/LPS/DOCX –have successfully revealed their activities and loss continues to be the only issue.
Justice requirements equivalent treatment: probably, a condition determine judge should look to the OCC action and ORDER the servicing company to apply the same process, by agreement, as if it had decided where information are the same. ALL home foreclosures should be re-opened in the condition determine systems unless claims are registered and approved by OCC.
Because all of these solutions are new and untried it is difficult to determine the level of success that any of the customers or techniques will experience—including the claims with saying yes servicers. Already consumer supporters claim that the servicer-hired declare testers are likely to be one-sided and/or badly qualified. Customer supporters recommend that claims decided may be randomly low and may require is attractive within the structure of the Approval process. In any case, well recorded and consistent claims will be be necessary for rights to be done. Per Mandelman, “(A NOTE ABOUT BANKRUPTCY: If you are in bankruptcy, however, be sure to take the servicing company declare to your attorney, DO NOT FILE your “Request for Review” on your own.)”

About Securitization

When I first suggested that securitization itself was a lie, my comments were welcomed with shock and derision. No matter. When I see something I call it the way it is. The loans never remaining the release pad, much less went into a holding out around share of buyer cash. The whole factor was a fraud and AG Biden of Đelaware and Schniedermann of New You are able to are on to it.
The tip of the iceberg is that the observe was not sent to the traders. The gravitas of the situation is that the traders were never designed to get the observe, the mortgage mortgage or any certification except a check and a submission report. The game was on.
First they (the financial commitment banks) took cash from the traders on the bogus pretenses that the ties were actual when anyone with 6 months experience on Wall street could tell you this was not a connection for lots of reasons, the most basic of which was that there was no client. The prospectus had no loans because there were no loans made yet. The mortgage companies certainly wouldn' t take the risks presented by this toxic pile of loans, so they were awaiting the traders to get mislead. Once they had the cash then they realized out how to keep as much of it as possible before even looking for residential home debtors.
None of the specifications of the Internal Revenue Code on REMICS were followed, nor were the specifications of the combining and maintenance contract. The facts are simple: the papers path as published never followed the actual path of actual dealings in which cash interchanged hands. And this was simply because the mortgage cash came from the traders apart from the papers path. The actual deal between house owner client and buyer mortgage provider was UNDOCUMENTED. And the actual path of records used in home foreclosures all contain conditions of fact concerning dealings that never occurred.
The observe is "evidence" of the debts, not the debts itself. If the client mortgage provider credited cash to the house owner client and neither one of them finalized a single papers recognizing that deal, there is still an responsibility. The cash from the client mortgage provider is still a mortgage and even without certification it is a mortgage that must be returned. That bit of legal conclusion comes from common law.
So if the observe itself represents a deal in which ABC Loaning credited the cash to the house owner client it is mentioning a deal that does not now nor did it ever are available. That observe is proof of an responsibility that does not are available. That observe represents a deal that never occurred. ABC Loaning never credited the house owner client any cash. And the conditions of reimbursement designed by the securitization records were never unveiled to the house owner buyer. Therefore the observe with ABC Loaning is proof of a non-existent deal that mistates the conditions of reimbursement by making out the conditions by which the client mortgage provider would be returned.
Thus the observe is proof of nothing and the mortgage mortgage obtaining the conditions of the observe is equally incorrect. So the traders are suing the mortgage companies for making the mortgage companies in the position of having an debts wherein even if they had security it would be decreasing in value like a stone losing to the earth.
And as for why mortgage companies who realized better did it this way --- follow the cash. First they took an undisclosed generate spread top quality out of the client mortgage provider cash. They squirreled most of that cash through Barbados which " asserted" legislation of the deal for tax requirements and then waived the taxation. Then the mortgage companies created bogus people and "pools" that had nothing in them. Then the mortgage companies took what was remaining of the client mortgage provider cash and financed loans upon request without any underwriting.
Then the mortgage companies stated they were taking a loss on fails when the loss was that of the client mortgage companies. To add offend to injury the mortgage companies had used some of the client mortgage provider cash to buy insurance, credit ratings standard trades and create other credit ratings improvements where they --- not the client mortgage provider ---- were the successor of a benefit based on the standard of home mortgages or an "event" in which the nonexistent share had to be noticeable down in value. When did that discount occur? Only when the completely owned completely managed additional of the financial commitment bank said so, speaking as the " master maintenance company."
So the truth is that the providers and counterparties on CDS paid the mortgage companies instead of the client mortgage companies. The same factor occurred with the tax payer bailout. The claims of bank failures were bogus. Everyone lost cash except, of course, the mortgage companies.
So who has the loan? The buyer mortgage companies. Who has the note? Who likes you, it was worth less when they started; but if anyone has it it is most probably the beginning "lender" ABC Loaning. Who has the mortgage? There is no mortgage mortgage. The mortgage mortgage contract was published and implemented by the client obtaining the payment schemes that were neither unveiled nor actual.

Prejudice in Arizona Courts 11-20-10

Unknown to the American Public, the 1st Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, (freedom of speech), along with other rights, were violated by Judge Karen Potts of Arizona, causing financial damage to homeowners throughout the US. A former supporter of Habitat for Humanity and other organizations for fair treatment of defendants, Potts operated outside her judicial authority by supporting mortgage fraud, and aided and abetted in grand theft of the American dream.

Everyone in the US knows about the meltdown that\’s happening in the mortgage system, first it was the recession caused by uninsured subprime mortgages and now due to mortgage fraud – foreclosures are being frozen by lenders – everyone knows this – except for Judge Potts. Here\’s what happened:

On that fateful day, Potts threw the legal Mexican American immigrant family of Isai C. and Rosa M. Garcia and their children into the streets, despite a challenge to the Eviction and mortgage and foreclosure process filed in her own courthouse.

In this first Arizona Eviction jury trial, Judge Potts refused to allow a jury of peers. All Hispanic jury applicants were tossed out, a highly intelligent European immigrant who spoke four languages as well, eliminated. A jury of equals to her meant 1 white man and the rest were white women, no equals. One of the women had a relationship to an Eviction company. This was a jury of peers in her Judge Potts eyes. Yes, lady justice is blind and more.

Rumor has it that in pretrial, questions to be asked were discussed between Potts, the Plaintiff Attorney Hebert and Defense Attorney Loeb, but no defendant questions were permitted by Potts. Interestingly enough, in this case there was NO plaintiff to be questioned by defense council, none appeared in court – only plaintiff\’s attorney (plaintiff was US government, Freddie Mac) and a process server. All 59 questions of defense attorney were all denied by Potts. Judge Potts limited questions and evidence, making it difficult for Attorney Loeb to present a case, more than difficult – it was impossible.

What wasn\’t permitted in court was critical: In August 2005, there was an illegal trade of the property through MERS to another investor, and a Servicer, no legal transfer of documents between banks and beneficiaries, no notifications. By using illegal notary transactions by secretaries of the Foreclosing Trustee, and others notarizing each other\’s signature they created an illegal transfer. These illegal \’Robo Signers\’ are part of what was determined weeks ago to be illegal. Still Potts allowed forged documents, not even mailed by certified mail, to be used to foreclose. The Federal government has frowned on it – but Judge Potts, refused to support fairness and participated in the foreclosure fraud by not allowing it to be questioned in this case.

This Robo Signing, is absolute forgery, fraud were never brought up, the jury was not permitted to hear a single word about it. Potts protected the former administration\’s home mortgage fraud and permitted no evidence on record for the defendant. Her constant threats of admonishment and possible jail time to the defendant\’s attorney (for not laying down and playing dead) was more her style. Perhaps, justice needs to be mute. In Pott\’s case it would serve justice.

The Jury was illegally, swayed by the judge in favor of the Plaintiff by Potts\’ direct instruction to them to find the Plaintiff was the legal owner of the property, even though it acquired Title illegally. This deserves removal from the bench. The court reporter laughed and giggled as the Judge yelled at the Defense Attorney.

The entire American Dream is collapsing due to the former administration and its non-regulatory stance on the housing and home mortgage industry. Over 100,000 mortgages are currently in review, and over 85 million more homes are at risk right now.

Judge Potts, herself, violated judicial code and didn\’t allow a fair trial. She allowed abuse of judicial discretion and created a biased hearing prejudiced in favor of Freddie Mac. It appeared that she didn\’t know how to run a jury trial. She constantly was jumping on and admonishing the defense attorney, not permitting questions or witnesses – she was stomping on the civil rights of the defendants and all U.S. citizens. She should be subjected to Judicial Review for not allowing evidence.

A review of the transcript of this trial absolutely will remove anyone\’s doubts. And in the meantime, a family is set to be homeless at Judge Potts\’ wrongful instructions to the jury. The 911 attack took away many civil rights of American Citizens. Judge Potts just took away the rest – is there any American Citizens willing to fight for the American Dream?

From notes taken from Case # CV2010-090145 (Maricopa County, Arizona) 10/14-15/2010 Reported by John W. of ChallengeYourLender.com a company who teaches homeowners their rights and how to challenge mortgage fraud.

The Mortgage Industry Has Befrauded You and the US Government Challenge Your Lender right now. ChallengeYourLender Be amazed by discovering how you\’ve been stolen from. Challenge Your Lender!