Foreclosure law

Firms can finance themselves on- or off-balance sheet. Off-balance sheet financing involves transferring assets to "special purpose vehicles" (SPVs), following accounting and regulatory rules that circumscribe relations between the sponsoring firm and the SPVs. SPVs are carefully designed to avoid bankruptcy. If the firm's bankruptcy costs are high, off-balance sheet financing can be advantageous, especially for sponsoring firms that are risky. In a repeated SPV game, firms can "commit" to subsidize or "bail out" their SPVs when the SPV would otherwise not honor its debt commitments. Investors in SPVs know that, despite legal and accounting restrictions to the contrary, SPV sponsors can bail out their SPVs if there is the need. We find evidence consistent with these  predictions using data on credit card securitizations.

İİK m. 82/12 uyarınca, borçlunun haline münasip evi haczedilemez. Bu makalede, borçlunun haline münasip evi kavramından ne anlaşılması gerektiği, bunun hukuki sonuçları, haczedilemezlik iddiasının usûlü ve bu hususlar hakkındaki tartışmalar ele alınmıştır.

If a Plaintiff cannot prove their ownership of the note or mortgage BEFORE initiating the legal proceeding called foreclosure, then that party "lacked the capacity to envoke the jurisdiction of the court" and jurisdiction arguments can be brought at any time in any case. These are my notes.

Meaning of Jurisdiction
• The term jurisdiction has been derived from two Latin terms – ‘juris’ meaning law and ‘dicta’ meaning speech. So the term basically means “I speak by the law”.

• Jurisdiction has not been defined under the Code of Civil Procedure (hereinafter CPC or the Code). Black’s Law dictionary defines the term as “A court's power to decide a case or issue a decree.”

• If a case has been decided by a court which does not have jurisdiction to decide that matter, such lack of jurisdiction will go back to the root of matter and authority of court to decide that matter can be challenged.

of the FBI's Office for Victim Assistance What is mortgage servicing fraud? Mortgage Servicing Fraud occurs post loan origination when mortgage servicers use false statements and book-keeping entries, fabricated assignments, forged signatures and utter counterfeit intangible Notes to take a homeowner's property and equity. This is accomplished by using one or more of the following tactics. The Swindler's List: o Falsely claiming to be the owner/holder in due course of the tangible Note; o Paying Bonuses to workers who force homeowners into foreclosure; o Request homeowners to submit and resubmit loan mod paperwork multiple times that pays the bank $1,500 each time. o Falsely claiming legal standing by use of names such as Trustee, Assignee, Nominee, Beneficiary, etc.; o Using fraud, false statements and evidence to invoke the jurisdiction of the court; o Preying on the ignorance of the court and homeowner; o Deceptively convincing borrowers to agree to unfair and abusive loan terms, or systematically violating those terms in ways that make it difficult for the borrower to defend against; o Took out forced-placed insurance on property they did not own; o Altering/modifying loan terms without the legal authority to do so; o Falsely claiming Pooling & Servicing Agreements, industry standards, rules, guidelines or other industry-authored writings supersede the law; o Failing to follow PSA, SEC and regulatory guidelines; o Using fraudulent means to obtain AAA-ratings on "crappy loans"; o Robo-Signing legal documents without review or the legal authority to do so; o Entering on-time payments as late, to exact illegal and unauthorized fees; o Manipulating account records; o Feloniously claim REMIC tax-exempt status; o Claim homestead-exemption status as a corporation; o Falsely claimed tangible Notes were transferred to the Trusts; o Participate in the active concealment of origination fraud; o Converted paper Notes to digital images with no law to support it; o Destroyed original Notes to, inter-alia, cover-up origination fraud; o Backdating legal documents; o Filing forged/faked documents in courts and public land records; o Charging force-placed insurance when the homeowner already has full coverage; o Falsely report a default to the credit bureaus when it is the servicer who altered records to

And... the games continue and they're no fun.  Lying lawyers are spewing their BS yet again; from the little I've read so far, is the same garbage they shoveled before.  No rule of law any more if ever there was.  Now, have to reply to this... going to the 9th Circus of compromised/coopted criminals.  Not holding my breath.

It is as the title suggests, a compendium of "Capacity" cases. Cases where the capacity of the suing entity has been challenged and decided on.
Rule 1.120(a), Fla. R. Civ. P.
RULE 1.120. PLEADING SPECIAL MATTERS
(a) Capacity. It is not necessary to aver the capacity of a party to sue or be sued, the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, or the legal existence of an organized association of persons that is made a party, except to the extent required to show the jurisdiction of the court. The initial pleading served on behalf of a minor party shall specifically aver the age of the minor party. When a party desires to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party, the capacity of any party to sue or be sued, or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, that party shall do so by specific negative averment which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader’s knowledge.

David and Mary Ellen Wolf were several payments behind on their home mortgage and knew that foreclosure loomed.
They were puzzled, though, when a foreclosure notice came early in 2011 from Wells Fargo because they hadn’t done business with that bank.
They asked their West University neighbor, lawyer W. Craft Hughes, for help. After poring over mortgage records, Hughes came to the conclusion that neither Wells Fargo nor its mortgage servicer, Carrington Mortgage Services, had legal claim to the note on the house or the right to foreclose.
A state district court jury in Harris County agreed last month and awarded the Wolfs $5.4 million after a
four-day trial

While courts are slanted to accept presumptions in favor of Corporate Attorneys, I do not have to be, I am not an attorney.  The following brief is what the Wells Fargo attorneys filed to excuse their use of a fake Grant Deed to create an IN REM order to deny the homeowner her due process.

This brief takes two views....one is that the attorneys did not know the deed was fake....therefore the IN REM order was valid, because they did not know.  The other is that since they believed the IN REM order to be valid, they did not have to notice the Appellant at the time it was filed.

The reply completely dances around the fact that the Grant Deed was a fabrication and a simple act of verifying it at the County Recorders office would have revealed this fact to be true.  Yet Wells Fargo and their attorneys all plead ignorant of the ability to verify for themselves.

The Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission has been called upon to examine the financial and economic crisis that has gripped our country and explain its causes to the American people. We are keenly aware of the significance of our charge, given the economic damage that America has suffered in the wake of the greatest financial crisis since the Great Depression.

Our task was first to determine what happened and how it happened so that we could understand why it happened. Here we present our conclusions. We encourage the American people to join us in making their own assessments based on the evidence gathered in our inquiry. If we do not learn from history, we are unlikely to fully recover from it. Some on Wall Street and in Washington with a stake in the status quo
may be tempted to wipe from memory the events of this crisis, or to suggest that no one could have foreseen or prevented them. This report endeavors to expose the facts, identify responsibility, unravel myths, and help us understand how the crisis could have been avoided. It is an attempt to record history, not to rewrite it, nor allow it to be rewritten.

The objective of this project is to determine whether residential real estate property assignments within the Seattle city limits involving Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) are valid and in accordance with Washington State Law in light of the 2012 State Supreme Court decision in Bain v. Metropolitan Mortgage Group, Inc.

Respectfully,  I ask that you do some more research on this decade-long litigation at every level of the MA State and Federal judiciary... Review my website... An unprecedented ELEVEN (11) recusals (9 Federal, 2 MA State) - and that's AFTER judicial misconduct was evidenced for the record....  We're far beyond "Angering" a corrupt judicial officer... This litigation is now being recognized as - the most egregious abuse of judicial power ever RECORDED in the history of The United States.

Register O’Brien:“People need to know that this is not a Democrat or Republican issue! It is an American issue; one that strikes at the very backbone of our country – people’s property rights; and to make deals and turn a blind eye to fraud is awful!”

Recently, Wells Fargo Bank was handed the most humiliating defeat and
verdict ever by a federal court in Southern District of Ohio. This ruling clearly demonstrates the frustration of the judicial system with the predatory banks, especially Wells Fargo, the #1 largest “subprime” lender and trustee of asset backed securities trusts, and their agents who continued to steam roll borrowers“Mortgagee” or “Note Holder”, stealing billions from investors in the process, whom they are hired to serve.

Nationally recognized anti-illegal foreclosure Attorney Max Gardner list's the top 200 signs that within your foreclosure evidence file you have false, forged, fabricated &/or impossible to legally exist documents created specifically by the foreclosing entity to create the appearance in a court of law of the foreclosing entitie's lawful right to foreclose against you.

Investors in mortgage-backed securities, built on the shoulders of the tax-advantaged
Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (“REMIC”), may be facing extraordinary tax losses
because of how bankers and lawyers structured (or failed to structure) these securities. This
calamity is compounded by the fact that those professional advisors should have known that the
REMICs they created were flawed from the start.

Each such bundle/trust has a Cut Off Date identified in the trust documents (specifically, in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement). The Cut Off Date is the date on which all mortgage loans in the trust must be identified. In short, a final list of all of the mortgages in the bundle is set out. Each trust also has a Closing Date which is the date that the individual mortgages are transferred to the Trust
Custodian, who must certify that for each mortgage, the custodian has a mortgage note endorsed in blank and proof that the ownership of the note has been transferred. This proof is most often an Assignment of Mortgage. Most
trusts included the following or equivalent language regarding the Assignments:
“Assignments of the Mortgage Loans to the Trustee (or its nominee) will not be recorded in any jurisdiction, but will be delivered to the Trustee in recordable form, so that they can be recorded in the event recordation is necessary in
connection with the servicing of a Mortgage Loan.

Consumer credit transactions, from retail installment contracts, to mortgages, to
automobile leases, to credit cards, often generate assignments. The recipients of
assignments -- those who assume rights and obligations from the original creditors --
often face a minefield of state and federal laws which may trigger liability. This paper
contrasts various liability possibilities which assignees may face in these situations.