PDA

View Full Version : Get A Free Home


DABTL
October 15, 2010, 13:32
If you loan is done by a 'servicer' ask for proof of ownership of the note.

I was told the name and address of the owner of the debt was 'private' and I could not get them. From PNC.

First, there are no original records. Only electronic junk from MERS.

The notes are either missing or destroyed it appears.

The only copies have assignments in blank, never filled in.

For the most part if you cannot prove the assignment of the note, you cannot collect the debt.

See your lawyer.

Skilter
October 15, 2010, 13:55
we are about to close on our refi... should I not? I don't think I should not because it is my belief that the fed or congress is going to jump in and do something about this...

There is NO WAY they are going to let all these notes go.

2barearms
October 15, 2010, 16:34
Jesus, can i say that in the same sentence with DABTL? what idiot here
is channeling Bill.

gates
October 15, 2010, 17:39
Never happen - congress will make another run at retroactively making robosigning legal - Obummer will NOT veto it this time - blows up the folks that hold the power - wait and see... and YES, I am a jaded MFer... with damn good reason.

D P Six
October 16, 2010, 14:44
I have also been reading as of late that if there is no signed paper trail from borrower to present note holder, the borrower cannot legally be forclosed on. It would also seem likely that Washington will perform some judicial magic to protect their banker patrons.

DABTL
October 17, 2010, 07:51
The systemic failure of the banks is occurring before your eyes.

First, MERS has very few employees and thousands of Vice Presidents. You can purchase a MERS corporate seal on their website. This fraud was done to meet the judicial requirements to foreclose in many states. It required the signature of an executive of the foreclosing entity to certify the transactions. So, buy a seal and work for one of the foreclosure mills and be a VP at the same time. Cool.

Second, all documents in their original form were destroyed. Many notes were assigned in blank, so proving who they were assigned to is impossible, the maker then is in the unique position of owing no entity. Sometimes the original mortgage broker, usually a fly by night operation gone long ago, did not include a note with the mortgage package.

Finally, there was absolutely no due diligence exercised.

I do not think that even a Tea Party Congress will have the courage to bail out the banks.

I also think we will have a chance to test Herbert Hoover's theories out in real life shortly.

festus
October 17, 2010, 10:07
Every time a home is sold the county has to get a change in deed fee, if that's what it is called. Local governments have been cheated out of billions of dollars in taxes across the country. Why isn't there a class action lawsuit against the banks for cheating on tax payments?

W.E.G.
October 17, 2010, 10:13
Mister, we could use some men like Herbert Hoover again...

<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/e0wnsAhNxr0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/e0wnsAhNxr0?fs=1&amp;hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>

D P Six
October 17, 2010, 11:23
Originally posted by DABTL


all documents in their original form were destroyed. Many notes were assigned in blank, so proving who they were assigned to is impossible, the maker then is in the unique position of owing no entity. Sometimes the original mortgage broker, usually a fly by night operation gone long ago, did not include a note with the mortgage package. Can't imagine any title insurance company signing off on any of this stuff. So how is it resold even if it can be forclosed on?

DABTL
October 17, 2010, 16:12
Originally posted by D P Six
Can't imagine any title insurance company signing off on any of this stuff. So how is it resold even if it can be forclosed on?

Some title companies have quit insuring repo houses from banks.

I suspect more will soon follow suit unless the bank can come up with a viable owner. That will be hard to do with no note and no assignments with ink signatures.

DABTL
October 17, 2010, 19:18
Originally posted by W.E.G.
Mister, we could use some men like Herbert Hoover again...



You have a shot at it.

But, you might want to get in on the action rather than being a curmudgeon.

Try this out for fun with your 'servicer' and see what happens.

http://action.seiu.org/page/speakout/wheresthenote

PNC told me the owner of my note was confidential and I was not entitled to know who owns it. Now, you of all people should understand fraud and a lawyers response. Maybe not.

Jaxxas
October 17, 2010, 20:48
Figures! I pay off my mortgage and now I find out I could have gotten it for free.:cry:

W.E.G.
October 17, 2010, 21:22
Originally posted by DABTL
...you might want to get in on the action rather than being a curmudgeon.


Me?

a "cumudgeon" in your eyes?


Gosh Dabs, coming from you that's a high compliment.

I think you made me blush.

gates
October 17, 2010, 21:37
There will be no "free" houses - you borrowed the money - it is a debt - you OWE it! the fact the people that LOANED you the money are corrupt fuks has ZERO bearing on whether or not YOU signed the loan DOCs - YOU wanted the house, YOU borrowed the money expecting to pay it back! The Judges will see it the same way!

Do I think there is a break in the chain of title? YEP! I DO! does that absolve you of the debt YOU WILLINGLY signed up for?
-- NO FUKING WAY!

Bottom line - if you have a mortgage - SOMEONE ELSE owns your home - you want to break the agreement fine - mail the keys and they get their property back - if you are concerned about WHO you are paying then open an escrow acct and stop paying the servicer - there is NO WAY TPTB will allow "free homes".... stupid idea.

W.E.G.
October 17, 2010, 21:42
Dabs still gets a kick being chased around the field by the donkey with a hard on.

Figures if the donkey never actually violates him, he won something.

Keeps forgetting its whose field he is in that controls the ultimate outcome.

As long as you don't mind the donkey, and the guy standing on the other hill watching the whole circus, its all good sport.

Topbanana
October 17, 2010, 22:01
I thought Dabs went bye-bye.

TheOtherChris
October 17, 2010, 22:22
Originally posted by festus
Every time a home is sold the county has to get a change in deed fee, if that's what it is called. Local governments have been cheated out of billions of dollars in taxes across the country. Why isn't there a class action lawsuit against the banks for cheating on tax payments?

When a bank loans money on real estate, they don't take title to it.
They are granted a LIEN (by the borrower) on the property.
There is no transfer of title or ownership (except AFTER a foreclosure) so no transfer tax is due.

Also, some states do not have transfer fees. In such jurisdictions, a house can passed back and forth between people every week if that floats their boat.

Originally posted by D P Six
Can't imagine any title insurance company signing off on any of this stuff. So how is it resold even if it can be forclosed on?

Many title companies are already on the hook because they insured the loan AND the foreclosure so there is very little additional risk to insure the sale out from the foreclosing bank.
The can is just kicked down the road a bit further.
Remember that title insurance only pays the insured IF they suffer a covered loss. So unless the previous owner successfully wins a suit to nullify the foreclosure, there is no loss to the new owner and therefore no claim against the title company.

gates
October 17, 2010, 22:43
Hmm... W.E.G. - who do you suppose the "donkey" is sport:-)

thunderchicken
October 18, 2010, 10:50
I think this is mostly a non-issue in deed of trust states. Maybe there is an action against the bank for fraud by the public trustee or borrower in a foreclosure, but after the issue of the deed in foreclosure title is purt near inviolable. Hell, a sheriff's deed is nearly as good as a government patent in my view.

The public trustee isn't going to release the deed of trust without evidence of payment, no one is getting a free house.

DABTL
October 18, 2010, 11:37
Originally posted by gates
There will be no "free" houses - you borrowed the money - it is a debt - you OWE it! the fact the people that LOANED you the money are corrupt fuks has ZERO bearing on whether or not YOU signed the loan DOCs - YOU wanted the house, YOU borrowed the money expecting to pay it back! The Judges will see it the same way!

Do I think there is a break in the chain of title? YEP! I DO! does that absolve you of the debt YOU WILLINGLY signed up for?
-- NO FUKING WAY!

Bottom line - if you have a mortgage - SOMEONE ELSE owns your home - you want to break the agreement fine - mail the keys and they get their property back - if you are concerned about WHO you are paying then open an escrow acct and stop paying the servicer - there is NO WAY TPTB will allow "free homes".... stupid idea.

That is the 'moral obligation' argument the whiner banks are using now.

A loan is an investment involving risk. If the risk works, you make a profit. If the risk is bad you lose.

I just received my documents from PMC. They are copies from MERS. The originals are gone. I promised to pay Commonwealth United Mortgage Company. Now, PNC says someone else owns the debt. Who owns the debt is 'confidential.'

And, if there is no assignment of the note, and the note was paid by someone, there is no debt.

Free house. Get it?

Varangian
October 18, 2010, 21:16
http://gonzalolira.blogspot.com/2010/10/this-is-what-brian-and-ilsa-said-to.html

gates
October 18, 2010, 22:24
Bill - the loan was made - there are records of it at the county level - what happened to it between A and B may and probably DOES have tax implications for those that fuked up in actually TRANSFERRING the titles to the MBS trusts - they didnt - REMIC - but! all that ultimately does is change the loan from secured to UN secured! the property still has a lien or the borrower does - there is no way on Gods green earth the Bankers are going to give people free homes - you - like Denninger - are counting on the rule of law! what do you think the outcome will be when the bankers OWN the lawmakers....

go try to get your "free" house - make sure you get back to us when you have CLEAR title in YOUR name because they failed to properly transfer YOUR obligation to the MBS it was sold to - could this blow up the banks YOU BET! but you will NOT get a free house. And YES I know what the fuk I am talking about!

If YOU get a free house EVERY mortgage in this country goes delinquent - RIGHT NOW! BOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!

will not happen.

DABTL
October 19, 2010, 07:14
Originally posted by gates
Bill - the loan was made - there are records of it at the county level - what happened to it between A and B may and probably DOES have tax implications for those that fuked up in actually TRANSFERRING the titles to the MBS trusts - they didnt - REMIC - but! all that ultimately does is change the loan from secured to UN secured! the property still has a lien or the borrower does - there is no way on Gods green earth the Bankers are going to give people free homes - you - like Denninger - are counting on the rule of law! what do you think the outcome will be when the bankers OWN the lawmakers....

go try to get your "free" house - make sure you get back to us when you have CLEAR title in YOUR name because they failed to properly transfer YOUR obligation to the MBS it was sold to - could this blow up the banks YOU BET! but you will NOT get a free house. And YES I know what the fuk I am talking about!

If YOU get a free house EVERY mortgage in this country goes delinquent - RIGHT NOW! BOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!

will not happen.

I know all this legal stuff is mysterious, but you need to read the Constitution. The right to contract is guaranteed against STATE actions, so that is out as a form of relief for the banks. So, it is up to the Feds.

If the Feds change the basics of contract law when the TBTF banks are in trouble, we will never again be able to sell any paper to foreign buyers. That simple. Investors loath uncertainty.

For fun I asked PNC Mortgage for copies of my loan. What I received were copies of a fax sent from my office in 2004 where I signed the loan papers and transmitted them to National City Mortgage. I suspect the originals were tossed a long time ago.

PNC admits they do not own the loan, but claim the owner's name and address are 'confidential' and cannot be disclosed. Smell fraud?

Now, take a look at this: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/guest-post-mortgages-were-pledged-to-multiple-buyers-at-the-same-time.html

The same loan may have been pledged to multiple 'trusts' as part of the REMIC mess.

Then segue over to this: http://www.angrybearblog.com/2010/10/state-antiquated-property-registration.html

Antiquated state laws governing property are the cause of the mess? That is the same as your moral duty to pay argument, just a bit more dolled up.

But, you could be right about the banks owning Congress. And, they might change the laws fundamentally to gouge us more.

But, it costs me no more than I already pay to see if I can clear away a debt that is screwed up beyond imagining. You never know till you try. It is a safer bet than your theories about buying stocks.

gates
October 19, 2010, 12:08
No you misunderstand me - the only time morality comes into play is when someone thinks they are going game the system to try and get a free house and get a pass on their obligation - I view a home buying transaction as a straight business deal - there is a contract, if one party choses to break it there are remedies available- in this case they get the collateral back. SOMEONE owns the house if you have a mortgage on it - and it aint you until you retire the mortgage.

Watch Ratigans show this afternoon - there were hints that he and Denninger are going to talk about this very issue.

DABTL
October 19, 2010, 15:39
Originally posted by gates
No you misunderstand me - the only time morality comes into play is when someone thinks they are going game the system to try and get a free house and get a pass on their obligation - I view a home buying transaction as a straight business deal - there is a contract, if one party choses to break it there are remedies available- in this case they get the collateral back. SOMEONE owns the house if you have a mortgage on it - and it aint you until you retire the mortgage.

Watch Ratigans show this afternoon - there were hints that he and Denninger are going to talk about this very issue.

And, when the contract is unenforceable? Give me a break.

gates
October 19, 2010, 15:45
Bill - if you think congress isnt going to go back and "fix" this you are nuts - they already tried once and Obama vetoed it - they will try again - the banks wont be giving away free houses. I'll say it again - the very FIRST person that gets a "free house" will motivate EVERYONE to "get theirs" and it all blows up.

DABTL
October 19, 2010, 15:49
Originally posted by gates
Bill - if you think congress isnt going to go back and "fix" this you are nuts - they already tried once and Obama vetoed it - they will try again - the banks wont be giving away free houses. I'll say it again - the very FIRST person that gets a "free house" will motivate EVERYONE to "get theirs" and it all blows up.

And, pay attention to Denninger. There is no reasonable fix. Got that? No reasonable fix.

All that goofy legislation the President vetoed would have done is allowed sloppy notarizations. Nothing else. It would have caused the fever to lower but the disease rages on.

ThunderGod
October 19, 2010, 17:01
So Bill, you're saying that there is a company that wants you to send your mortgage payments to them, on behalf of an unidentified, confidential client that *supposedly* holds your mortgage? Neither of which is the company you signed your contract with? And all they offer for proof is a fax of a copy of a fax?

Yeah, I can see some potential problems, there.


gates, where is the "morality" involved if Bill's mortgage was "sold" to more than one entity? He could pay PNC, only to have ABC foreclose on him next year, with actual copies of the original paperwork. Or, DEF, GHI and JKL come forward with their own copies of faxed copies of copied faxes.....:o

motosapien
October 19, 2010, 19:21
Refinancing was all the rage up until the bottom fell out. How did those work? Bank B is not going to pay off a note that Bank A does not hold right?
This whole thing boggles the mind. So perhaps the banks gave up on the actual title all together? They figure they do not need it anymore.

That is, until they need to foerclose and some pesky state attorney general starts asking questions..............

gates
October 19, 2010, 19:49
There is a fix - how reasonable I do not know - reverse the process, put the mortgage back to the previous holder until clear title can be produced - not my fix - Denningers. There ARE origination records at the county level... - No free house for YOU!

gates
October 19, 2010, 22:03
Here's the deal - IMO there is a dichotomy - the borrowers that KNEW and gamed the system and the 5% that were too stupid to know they were being had... the 5% need to be helped - the rest... you roll the dice you takes your chances... you want a free house? you're no better than the fraudsters that put us here... there IS no free lunch people! And if there IS the perception that a free lunch is available EVERYONE will crowd to the table - this is BASIC human nature guys - COMMON!

TheOtherChris
October 19, 2010, 22:16
Originally posted by motosapien
Refinancing was all the rage up until the bottom fell out. How did those work? Bank B is not going to pay off a note that Bank A does not hold right?
This whole thing boggles the mind. So perhaps the banks gave up on the actual title all together? .....

Let's review:
The home buyer HAS "actual title" to the house; NOT the bank. The bank has a LIEN on the property in the form of a mortgage or deed of trust. That lien is recorded at the courthouse.

When you refi, the new lender sends the money from the new loan (via the title company, attorney or closing agent) to the record lien holder who then processes the release of the recorded lien.
It has worked that way for decades, and still does today.

gates
October 19, 2010, 22:26
TOC - no it didn't! during the securitization process - they violated REMIC rules and tried to ROBOSIGN the problem away - congress played ball but Obummer played the union pension card and vetoed the "ROBO" get out of jail free card - docs have been lost or forged or purposely destroyed - this is a BIG FUKIN PROBLEM that has attracted the attention of ALL 50 STATES ATTY GENERALS - STATE UNION PENSION FUND ATTYS - and as of tonight FEDERAL INVESTIGATORS!

tip of the iceburg.

I have spent the last 3 years reading EVERYTHING of note on this collapse- 8 hours a day - every day- for 3 years! I could have a friggin LAW degree or an MBA in less time! - I have a fair Idea of what I am talking about!

TheOtherChris
October 20, 2010, 00:04
The part I referred to has and still is the case.
I am not talking about trying to figure who the Note holder is.
I answered Moto's question about how a refi works with this mess.
My answer has nothing to do with foreclosures and whether they're lawful.
It is just the mechanics of how the lien (not the loan) works.
When paid, the Deed of Trust or Mortgage gets released of record by the entity that entity that recorded it in the first place and it is still going on today.

Robosigning only applies to states where a judicial foreclosure is required.
The statutes governing NON-judicial foreclosure are quite simple in most states. There is a timeline of what must be done, but many do not require legal review, so the affidavits, notices, etc. are signed by whomever did the work.

I know that several of the western states also have statutes addressing a for value purchase after foreclosure. They have a LOT of protection.
Sure, the original borrower could litigate whether the foreclosure was authorized, but they can't get the house back from a legitimate 3rd party buyer.

I have been very involved in this process for over 20 years.

thunderchicken
October 20, 2010, 16:57
It seems to me that even where judicial foreclosure is required one has at most a defense against the foreclosure which even if it prevails doesn't extinguish the lien. The most a homeowner might hope for is the ability to thwart a foreclosure, but the lien remains on the homeowners "free" house and will be satisfied when the house is conveyed.

gates
October 20, 2010, 16:59
TC - I think you are correct.