I Support John Wright and All Americans That Have Been Abused by Bank of America, American Honda Financial Corp and Chase Manhattan

OCCUPY LOS ANGELES – - LETTER TO AG KAMALA HARRIS

Piggybankblog — Sun, 05 Feb 2012 18:19:54 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .

OCCUPY L.A. - LETTER TO AG KAMALA HARRIS

Attorney General Kamala Harris

Office of the Attorney General

1300 I Street Sacramento, CA 95814

We urge you to implement an immediate moratorium on foreclosures so you can investigate

Dear Attorney General Harris,

We appreciate and applaud the steps you have taken to ensure that justice is served to address system-wide mortgage, foreclosure and securities fraud in the State of California by implementing the Mortgage Fraud Strike Force, and by backing away from the 50-state foreclosure settlement deal currently being pushed by the banks and the Obama administration.

We urge you in the strongest of terms to remain steadfast in your refusal to accept this deal. Instead, we urge you to implement an immediate moratorium on foreclosures so you can complete your own investigation and prosecutions of fraud and securities fraud. If the banks do not comply with this moratorium, we urge you to issue injunctions.

We urge you to sue the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (MERS) for deceptive practices (as a suit brought by Attorney General Beau Biden in Delaware has done), and bar MERS from:

initiating any foreclosure actions in the company’s name, or via MERS in the name of a trust,
recording, assigning or taking any other actions on CA mortgages until the company has been audited and corrected, and insist that MERS:
correct the chain of title on CA mortgages recorded in county offices,
pay a $10,000 civil penalty for each consumer violation here

We urge you to follow in Nevada’s footsteps and support requiring banks, servicers and trustees to provide an affidavit proving a clear chain of title or face felony charges. Should the California Assembly and Senate enact a similar law, it would strengthen your enforcement authority over foreclosure fraud. The NV law has caused foreclosures to drop 88% since it went into effect in October.

We applaud your stand against the national settlement deal being brokered by the banks that makes a mockery of justice and fails to serve the communities of honest Californians. We agree that the deal is not good enough for California. It fails to serve the local governments that have watched 400 years of property law be destroyed. It fails to serve those who have been defrauded of their homes and lifesavings.

Lenders used fraud as a business model to create a system that guaranteed record profits and bonuses, while leaving a scorched earth of foreclosures and underwater mortgages.

Lenders put the ‘lie’ in liars loans, not the borrower, explains William K. Black, professor and former regulator who investigated the Savings & Loan crisis.

Credit rating agencies worked in collusion with the big banks to pass off toxic assets as highest-grade investments.

Fund managers gambled with the capital of mortgages and pension funds, putting those funds at undue risk.

The economic catastrophe that has resulted from these abuses has plunged the people of America into a plight unparalleled since the Great Depression.

In 2011, California was home to 38 of the top 100 worst hit zip codes — dominating the list of the top 100 zip codes hit hardest by foreclosures

Before any foreclosures resume, we need to see justice is served for bank-driven fraud and securities fraud. Specifically:

Completion of full investigation and prosecutions of lenders / banks / insurance providers / ratings agencies for mortgage, foreclosure and securities fraud throughout the system, including MERS and the companies it works with.
No “get out of jail free” settlement.
Correction of the property records.
Civil and criminal penalties commensurate with the vast scale of the crimes.

The financial industry through its dominance of the political and economic life of the nation executed a massive theft of private and public money. This historic crime of grand larceny and fraud must not be swept under the rug of history. It must be addressed, corrected and prevented from recurring.

Sincerely,

Occupy Activists

SOURCE: http://occupylosangeles.org/

The Potentially Dishonorable Judge James Chalfant of the Los Angeles Superior Court

Piggybankblog — Sat, 04 Feb 2012 16:13:15 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .
.

The Potentially Dishonorable Judge James Chalfant of the

L.A. Superior Court

Written by John Wright

February 2nd, 2012

There are many people out there that are wondering what the success rate of being granted a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) to stop the bank from fraudclosing on your home is. A TRO is basically asking the court to stop the foreclosure proceedings until a judge can hear your reasons as to why the foreclosure should not proceed. You must convince the judge that you will suffer “irreparable injury” if the judge does not stop the foreclosure. However, of course you will suffer “irreparable injury“ if the foreclosure takes place, which is why that is not the only question in the judge’s mind. The question is if it is a “legitimate foreclosure” or “illlegitimate fraudclosure” instead. The question is if the obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument. The question is if the person seeking enforcement (the bank) does not have the rights of a holder in due course. The question is if the obligor (homeowner) proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument. ( U.C.C. provision, U.C.C. §3-305(c) ) What is the likelihood of there being good reason for a TRO being granted in your situation? VERY LIKELY! This is after you consider that it is common knowledge that Wall Street bundled up thousands of loans together to sell resulting in multiple trusts with multiple beneficiaries. – click here

Therefore, it should be pretty easy to be granted a TRO, right? Wrong! Not in the state of California! This is because some judges have a zero tolerance for someone who they believe borrowed the money and now do not want to pay it back. This is why they tend to allow their personal politics to dictate how they will rule on the issue with zero accountablity, while they might believe it is more important to stop the homeowner from receiving a home free and clear than stopping the bank from receiving a home free and clear in a crime against humanity. Unfortunately, it appears that many judge’s are allowing their personal politics to dictate if they will grant the TRO or not and, simply put, your chances of being granted a TRO might solely depend on if the judge is a Republican or Democrat in the end. This is because I have heard that Republican judges are more likely to deny the TRO while dismissing your evidence that the bank is not the true owner of the debt. How do they get passed not having to listen to your evidence? Well, they might determine that your attorney did not checkmark the right box when filling the request. Which is why if your attorney did not dot the “I” or cross the “t” when filing the request they are most likely to throw you, you’re rights, and your stupid little TRO request right out of their courtroom faster than you can say “Civil Rights Violation.”

This is why Americans need to maybe start keeping baseball cards that show a judge’s picture and batting average on it with this TRO issue, while Americans work together to expose and hold accountable any judge in our legal system that is caught allowing their personal politics or investments or religion to dictate if the selling of slaves will continue in United States of America. This is because the decisions of these judges dismissing the laws to not grant you a TRO is a symptom of greater crisis at hand. The greater crisis is not that you are losing your home to a bank that does not own it, but that you might be losing a country that the bank is not supposed too own either.

Nevertheless, we are not asking much for a TRO while a crime is in progress. That is why it is time to start occupying courts that refuse a TRO to a homeowner while we say this:

.
.

The judges need to understand that no rock shall be left unturned in this fight.

Therefore, Piggybankblog is proud to announce that my Court of Public Opinion we will be opening a Wall of Shame and Wall of Fame for judges, while our first winner in this Wall of Shame will be The Potentially Dishonorable Judge James Chalfant of the Los Angeles Superior Court. This is because it was reported to me that Judge James Chalfant might be making his own rules and laws in Department 85 of the Los Angeles Superior Court. It was also reported to me that he yelled at the homeowner “SIT DOWN” after he went on the record with the fact that he would not even look at the evidence presented while saying things like “That’s how we do things in Department 85.” (Trying to get transcripts) Unknown to The Potentially Dishonorable Judge James Chalfant, he was actually presiding over a TRO hearing for a homeowner that I happened to be secretly following their story. That is because no judge will ever know what homeowner story that we may be following at any given time. This is because if the homeowner knew what day the theif was coming, they simply might wait until the day before to prepare for the theif. In a like manner, We The People shall come like a theif in the night. This is because the judge will not know what story we are following.

I submit exhibit A for evidence of this court – click here

Sit down Mr. Chalfant! You are now in my courtroom! The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

Here we come!

(Youtube or blog is not to suggest threat. Non-Violent legal protest disclaimer)

The whole world is watching!

That’s how we do things in this department. (Wink)

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

President Obama Warns Banks In State of The Union Address

Piggybankblog — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 20:00:54 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .
.

President Obama Warns Banks In State of The Union Speech

January 25th, 2012

Did you watch the State of the Union Address last night? President Obama said the following about The Great Mortgage Crisis: “In 2008 the house of cards collapsed. We learned that mortgages were sold to people who could not afford or understand them. Banks had made huge bets and bonuses with other people’s money. Regulators had looked the other way or did not have the authority to stop the bad behavior. It was wrong. It was irresponsible. And it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, saddled us with more debt and left innocent hard working Americans holding the bag.” Well let’s take a look at what the President said here. The President said that: “The regulators had looked the other way or did not have the authority to stop the bad behavior.” I agree that the regulators looked the other way, but I do not agree that they did not have the authority to stop the bad behavior. Neither do they lack the ability to hold them accountable today for their bad behavior. This is because these banks were selling the same mortgage loans multiple times to multiple investors at the same time. Currently they are fraudclosing on homes where they have incorrectly identified the owner of the debt. This means that the banks are committing fraud on a massive scale. The regulators are still “looking the other way”. This is because there seems to be a crime in progress as we speak, as long as these banks are allowed to fraudclose on properties where they have incorrectly identified the owner of the debt. That is why I think there should be a foreclosure freeze that allows a process for every single homeowner to have access to a Chain of Title and Securitization check done. This should be mandatory because the situation does not seem to be isolated. The government should actually pay for each homeowner to have it done. This is because the President willingly admits that the regulators looked the other way. This means the government should be held accountable too. The implications of this might suggest that the regulators are in bed with banks, unless those very same regulators do something today to stop the potentially irregular, frauduent, illegal, and simply unsafe frauclosure practices of these banks with no further delay.

Previous to the State of the Union, state attorney generals and the Obama Administration met in Chicago. Many had theorized that the President would announce a weak sweetheart foreclosure settlement with big banks during the State of The Union. Instead, President Obama announced a full federal investigation into the fraudulent activities of big banks.

EXCLUSIVE: Obama To Announce Mortgage Crisis Unit Chaired By New York Attorney General Schneiderman

Date: 1/24/12

WASHINGTON — During his State of the Union address tonight, President Obama will announce the creation of a special unit to investigate misconduct and illegalities that contributed to both the financial collapse and the mortgage crisis.

The office, part of a new Unit on Mortgage Origination and Securitization Abuses, will be chaired by Eric Schneiderman, the New York attorney general, according to a White House official.

Schneiderman is an increasingly beloved figure among progressives for his criticism of a proposed settlement between the 50 state attorneys general and the five largest banks. His presence atop this new special unit could give it immediate legitimacy among those who have criticized the president for being too hesitant in going after the banks and resolving the mortgage crisis. He will be in attendance at Tuesday night’s State of the Union address.

“The goal of this joint investigation will be threefold: to hold accountable any institutions that violated the law; to compensate victims and help provide relief for homeowners struggling from the collapse of the housing market, caused in part by this wrongdoing; and to help us finally turn the page on this destructive period in our nation’s history,” reads a White House document outlining the objectives.

“This is a big achievement and something the entire progressive advocacy community wanted [with respect to] housing policy,” added the White House official.

The unit will not supersede the efforts already underway by the Department of Justice. Instead, it will operate as part of the president’s Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force. In addition to Schneiderman, the unit will be co-chaired by Lanny Breuer, assistant attorney general at the Criminal Division of the Department of Justice, Robert Khuzami, director of enforcement at the SEC; John Walsh, a U.S. attorney in Colorado, and Tony West, assistant attorney general in the Civil Division at DOJ.

News of the new mortgage unit comes amidst reports of a potential settlement between the five biggest banks, the Obama administration and the state attorneys general. Under the deal, banks would agree to follow existing laws against abusive foreclosures and set aside $25 billion to both help homeowners who are underwater on their homes or who were wrongfully foreclosed. The agreement has been in the works for months, with disagreements over the level of legal immunity granted to banks accused of wrongdoing, and the scope of violations covered by the deal.

Critics of the pending settlement have argued that the president should couple the financial relief for homeowners with a robust law enforcement effort targeting lawbreaking by big banks. Schneiderman has been among the settlement’s most prominent critics for months, insisting that a deal not release bankers from criminal charges, and urging AGs to look into violations outside the foreclosure process, including issuing fraudulent loans and improprieties in the packaging of those loans into complex bonds that would become toxic assets. – Huffington Post article

Please contact President Obama and tell him congraulations. Please also tell him that we want an investigation with real teeth. Tell him that we need $300 billion in relief for homeowners to reset our economy and bring justice to families. – click here

The President of The United States:

Complete State of The Union Speech: Click here

The President said: “This new unit will hold accountable those who broke the law.”

This could be the first step in holding these big banks accountable according to the laws of our land. It should never be a policy that payment for crime is good for the economy. Instead, it should be a policy that sends a message to the banks that crime does not pay. Otherwise, it could be very dangerous if we accept that we should look the other way when crime occurs, simply because it helps the economy. For example, there was a time that the world looked the other way when a man named Adolf Hitler thought it would help the German economy to throw the Jews out of their homes. Unfortunately, his Consumer Financial Protection Bureau looked like this – click here

For the record, the banks received enough bailout money to have given each homeowner over one hundred and fifty thousand dollars per homeowner. Now President Obama wants to give us only three thousand dollars a year? Huh? Whatever! Didn’t he just say he wanted it to be fair? How about we start there? (Wink)

At any rate, all eyes are on Richard Cordray of the new consumer agency and Eric Holder of the United States Justice Department. – Click article

I hope they know that the whole world is watching.

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

Title & Securitization Search Here

Piggybankblog — Thu, 26 Jan 2012 17:28:51 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. .

You can pause music below if you want

Is There A Break In The Chain of Title?

Written by John Wright

I was talking to one of my Bank of America Executive connections yesterday, who actually sits around the corporate table with Brian Moynihan. You see he owed me a favor on an unrelated situation, so I gave him a call yesterday, and we talked on the phone for over an hour. I have known him for some time now, but I have agreed to never reveal who he is on my blog because he says that he actually likes his job there. He is a good guy. I like him a lot. That is even if he is completely on the side of the bank with this issue.

As I always do with him, I brought up the fact that Bank of Living Off America received a taxpayer bailout. He replied: “Now John Wright, when are you going to stop bringing that bailout stuff up? We paid that all back with interest!” I answerd: “Yah, after BofA made interest on it! How about giving the taxpayer money to the homeowner for a change? We promise to give it back after we make interest on it too!” That is when he explained to me that Bank of Living Off America never wanted the money in the first place (Yawn), but that they were told that one of the other banks would collapse without it, in which the government said that they had to take it or nobody got the money. Whatever! Nobody is ever going to convince me that the government had to twist Bank of Betraying America’s arm to take free money!

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

At any rate, the last time we had talked, I had expressed to him that Countrywide might have sold the same loans several times concurrently. This is not only potentially illegal, but it means that there is a break in the chain of title and, therefore, the law potentially says that borrowers will NO LONGER OWE ANY MONEY ON THE LOAN. This is when he told me that he actually mentioned it to the other executives around the corporate table at a meeting, while asking them if it was true, in which one of them expressed that they were dealing with copies and that it could be true, but they felt it was isolated. I laughed and said: “Yah! Isolated to not being one of them it happened to!” That is when he said to me: “John, people cannot just get a free house out of this. They borrowed the money and have to pay it back.” I answered: “Well, maybe you have something there, but neither does it suggest that Bank of Stealing America should get a free house either! They might have already been paid back by several unidentified investors, multiple times, and by credit default swaps and insurance! A potential insurance fraud! Then the taxpayer had to bailout AIG! Now they want the homeowner to pay them again?” I explained to him that the difference between his opinion and mine was that THE LAW SEEMS TO BE ON MY SIDE! He replied: “Well, I am not talking about the law John. I am talking about how I feel about it.” Unfortunately, even though I did not agree with him, I did understand that he represents a large amount of people that believe that the importance of homeowners not getting something for nothing, might be more important than the law to them. This is why I believe the statement of “Nobody gets a house for free” is a negative PR driven bank campaign, as the other arms of this campaign are phrases like, “MORAL HAZARD” and “DEADBEAT BORROWER,” but are meant to deflect you from what the real issue is, which is that Wall Street has blown up our economy, while the banks have committed potentially irregular, fraudulent and simply unsafe mortgage practices.- Supporting Article

The point is that something is happening here!

Why does chain of title matter?

The chain of title refers to the history of passing of title ownership to real property from the present owner back to the original owner. Chain of title is a complete, accurate, and publicly recorded, history of instruments used to transfer ownership in a piece of property. Chain of title is a homeowners’ ultimate proof of ownership of his/her real property interests. Besides being conclusive proof of ownership, chain of title is the basis for title insurance, mortgage finance, and use of property as collateral for business loans. Moreover, a defective chain of title is unmarketable, meaning that properties with broken chains of title may be un-saleable (or if saleable, defective title may adversely affect the property’s price). – click here

Now I want to express to you how very important it is to be very careful about what company you use to do your Title and Securitization History Search because there is gold in them there hills! Now I knew there were many services out there that claimed that they could do an extensive search on your Title and Securitization history. The problem being that I felt that there were many of them out there that were simply lacking the tools to really give you a quality Title and Securitization search, in which I was concerned that they were just going down to the city and producing you something that you could have done on your own. That is why I THOROUGHLY investigated several companies that claimed they had the ability to find out if there were several trusts existing, while concluding that ONLY ONE of them could actually deliver an extensive quality search that I felt met my expectations for my supporters.

This is why you need to get a Title and Securitization Search done. .

Therefore, I have finally found a Title and Securitization company that I trust to be paid to advertise and send all of you to named National Mortgage Investigation. Now when the people at National Mortgage Investigation first contacted me I was very on guard. This is because there has been literally hundreds of people throughout the years trying to access my huge audience. Mainly because my supporters are comprised of many distressed and disgruntled homeowners’ who are unfortunately potential victims of Countrywide Home Loans and Bank of Bullshitting America’s potentially irregular, fraudulent, illegal, and simply unsafe mortgage and loan modification practices. This is why it just happened to be that National Mortgage Investigation’s timing to approach me could not have been better, because I had recently been working on educating my audience about what I believed to be the potentially fraudulent Bank of Bullshitting America’s Achilles heel in all this. Which is in the possibility that your loan had been concurrently sold into multiple Trusts at the same time. In other words, it would be equivalent to selling the same car over and over to several different people using a copy of the pink slip or title of the car. IT IS ILLEAGAL! Unfortunately, MERS provided the perfect environment for these banks to do this. Thanks Courts who allowed MERS to be used! Great effort in protecting the public! What is next? Are they going to approve a criminally started company that allows the copy of our driver’s license to be shown to the police officer who pulls over drivers, just so the criminal can escape? Anyway, the question is how do you prove there has been a break in the chain of title? The answer is to have a mortgage investigation Title and Securitization search done, so that you or your attorney are armed with proof that there has been a break in the chain of title in your situation.

I will return after this commercial break:

So it could be very likely that you find out that there has been a break in the chain of title, in which the law stipulates:
U.C.C. provision, U.C.C. §3-305(c): “An obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument if the person seeking enforcement of the instrument does not have rights of a holder in due course and the obligor proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument.”

LEGAL CITATION: U.S.C. §3-203

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE – ARTICLE 3 – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT

PART 2 – NEGOTIATION, TRANSFER, AND INDORSEMENT

§3-203 – TRANSFER OF INSTRUMENT; RIGHTS ACQUIRED BY TRANSFER.

(a) An instrument is transferred when it is delivered by a person other than its issuer for the purpose of giving to the person receiving delivery the right to enforce the instrument.

(b) Transfer of an instrument, whether or not the transfer is a negotiation, vests in the transferee any rights of the transferor to enforce the instrument, including any right as a holder in due course, but the transferee cannot acquire rights of a holder in due course by a transfer, directly or indirectly, from a holder in due course if the transferee engaged in fraud or illegality affecting the instrument.

In layman terms, this part of the law is discussing how an instrument is transferred to another party. It is crucial to know because of course the average promissory note is sold 5 times from the date of closing until present day, and that’s a low average as well. The most important paragraph is (b) where it says that the “transferee cannot acquire rights of a holder in due course by a transfer, directly or indirectly, from a holder in due course if the transferee engaged in fraud or illegality affecting the instrument.” Well in every single case, they engaged in fraud AND illegality which of course affected all the people’s security instruments (mortgage note).

LEGAL CITATION: U.S.C. §3-501

UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE – ARTICLE 3 – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS

PART 5 – DISHONOR

§3-501 – PRESENTMENT.

(a) “Presentment” means a demand made by or on behalf of a person entitled to enforce an instrument (i) to pay the instrument made to the drawee or a party obliged to pay the instrument or, in the case of a note or accepted draft payable at a bank, to the bank, or (ii) to accept a draft made to the drawee.

(b) The following rules are subject to Article 4, agreement of the parties, and clearing-house rules and the like:

(1) Presentment may be made at the place of payment of the instrument and must be made at the place of payment if the instrument is payable at a bank in the United States; may be made by any commercially reasonable means, including an oral, written, or electronic communication; is effective when the demand for payment or acceptance is received by the person to whom presentment is made; and is effective if made to any one of two or more makers, acceptors, drawees, or other payors.

(2) Upon demand of the person to whom presentment is made, the person making presentment must (i) exhibit the instrument, (ii) give reasonable identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person, reasonable evidence of authority to do so, and (iii) sign a receipt on the instrument for any payment made or surrender the instrument if full payment is made.

Again, the most important part of this law is paragraph (a) and paragraph (b)(2) which are the foundation of the “show me the note” argument which is clearly a very strong legal argument no matter what anyone says about it. Presentment is defined as a “demand made by or on behalf of a person entitled to enforce an instrument, to pay the instrument made to the drawee (lender/holder in due course) or a party (servicer) obliged to pay the instrument.” It goes on to say in a few paragraphs under it that upon demand of the person to whom presentment is made (borrower), the person making presentment (lender/holder in due course/servicer) must exhibit the instrument (show me my original instrument and give reasonable identification to who they are. If the person demanding presentment is servicing the loan then they need to provide you with the reasonable evidence of authority to do so! No more taking their words for the truth, we must let them know that we know the law, and that no one is going to ever take advantage of us, ever again!

What does that mean? It means that if your Chain of Title and Securitization Report should come back showing a break, you can tell Bank of Bullshitting America to stick it up their ass, because you don’t owe them anything other than a lawsuit, if they continue to harass you for a loan that they cannot prove who the owner of the debt is.

With that being said, we are not looking for a free house, but we are looking for a free country, which is a country that forces these banks to be accountable to the very same laws that we are forced to be accountable to. Why should We The People be held accountable and not Them The Banks? Let me tell you why………

‘I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.’ – Thomas Jefferson 1802
.
John O’Brien is the Southern Essex Country Register of Deeds in Massachusetts, who made national headlines when he refused to record certain post-foreclosure instruments in the absence of a Register’s prescribed Affidavit. This is because Mr. O’Brien believes that a particular instrument may have been ‘robo signed.’ John O’Brien stated: “My registry is a crime scene as evidenced by this forensic examination. This evidence has made it clear to me that the only way we can ever determine the total economic loss and the amount of damage done to the taxpayers is by conducting a full forensic audit of all registry of deeds in Massachusetts.” This is because John O’Brien’s thinks the nation’s largest banks created MERS (Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems) to dodge paying recording fees when a mortgage is assigned, while depriving taxpayers anywhere from $200 million to $400 million plus in lost revenue. He said that “MERS should absolutely be out of business,” while Mr. O’Brien has further tried to encourage other registers throughout the nation to pull their deposits from any banks that are affiliated with MERS. However, here is the best part, because John O’Brien asked and received permission from his State Treasurer, Steve Grossman, to remove a whopping $25 million dollars in deposits from, none other than, BANK OF DESTROYING AMERICA!

Article sent by O’Brien’s office: “If you have taken out a mortgage on (or refinanced) your home (or business property) in the last 10 years or so chances are the title of your property is clouded so badly that no one can legally foreclose on your loan. This is the result of an illegal, little known operation that was specifically setup to expedite the rapid securitization and trading of mortgage securities. Further it was explicitly devised to circumvent the centuries old democratic process of recording property ownership and mortgages against those properties at county clerks offices across the country.” - Read Article
.
John O’Brien: “My Registry will not be a knowing participant in this fraud against homeowners. From today forward, lenders be on notice, the Southern Essex District Registry of Deeds will not record robo-signed documents.”

So what does it mean if National Mortgage Investigation should produce you a report that shows that the loan exists in multiple Trusts or that there has been a break in the chain of title? Well it means that National Mortgage Investigation might have just sent you the lucky Golden Wonka Ticket! – click here

So Get on it! Get it done! Do it now before it is too late! Hold Banks accountable!

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

John’s Daily Blog for updates: Click here

Register to be part of my blog: Click here

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

Brookstone Granted Injunction By Honorable Judge Matz!

Written by John Wright

I have been recently been following a Brookstone Law Firm plaintiff’s case in the Angela Sacchi et al vs. Mortgage Electronic System Inc. lawsuit. On May 2nd, 2011, the Honorable Judge A. Howard Matz presided over this case filed in a United States District Court in Los Angeles California. Judge A. Howard Matz goes on the record with saying that he gets “a million of these cases,” and that he just did not think that he had an informed understanding of where the law is now and where it is heading with these kinds of lawsuits. Thus, the judge asked the Brookstone Law Firm contracted attorney, Deron Colby, if he could assist him in an experiment of sorts. The judge asked Mr. Colby if he could maybe educate him by preparing a chart that would show where the Deed of Trust went versus the Note because the judge said that he thought there was a “pervasive confusion” about to whom the plaintiffs might owe obligations and who had any right, if anyone had a right, to initiate foreclosure proceedings. The Honorable Judge Matz stated that it was a “vexing problem,” while he went on to say that this could be a “potential precedent-setting matter,” because it could be eventually used by other judges.

The judge also stated for the record:

“I want no efforts taken form here on forward, until this matter is considered more carefully, to throw these homeowners out of their residences, assuming that they’re currently there. I can make all the necessary findings. I’ll do so in a sweeping way that, based upon the current state of the Court’s – of the pleadings and the court’s recognition, the usual factors in weighing injunctive relief, especially the irreparability of the injury the public interests, clearly favor the homeowners or the borrowers.”

“I’m ordering the lawyers, including the lawyer for Sacchi who cited this case in reply papers, to, on a considered basis, brief the impact of Salazar. Do so with respect to not just that case narrowly but other cases in this crisis-ladened foreclosure national problem, including in other states that may have provisions comparable to California’s in the Civil Code and elsewhere.”

“One is to have the flow of key events set forth in diagram from top to bottom, meaning vertically, and the transfers of authority, of ownership, of servicing rights, of foreclosure rights, of trustee ownership to be signified through horizontal or diagonal flow chart that shows who got into the picture when, on behalf of whom and in place of whom, and then to have a chronology geared to the diagram.”

“…..I want to see the documentation, and I want to see the flow chart figuring out who fits in where and who’s out and who’s in and at what point in time, as we as the ongoing sequence of key events from the issuance of the loan or the executive of the note or Deed of Trust, which could be separate items. So don’t feel bound by the number system I have here. This is just designed to you an idea f what I’m looking for.”

The Honorable Judge Matz then tell the Bank of Stealing America not to do anything until he has seen this chart on June 6th, 2011d by saying “….don’t do anything. You’re now enjoined from doing anything to take away this home from this woman Guerero. You understand that? Transcript: Click here

So it finally sounds like we have ourselves a judge who says it the way it is! This is exactly why I have been telling you that you need to check the chain of title, because what did the judge say? He said that it seemed to “Clearly favor the homeowners or the borrowers.”

You Judge Matz and Attorney Deron Colby are good! You’re good you! You saw that there was something I was trying to do and you figured that out! You’re very good you!

I am sure that Mr. Colby must be feeling much the same as Billy Crystal right about now. (lol) However, I have to admit, I felt as excited as Robert De Niro when I found out about this case at Brookstone Law Firm. It even made it to Westlaw: Click here

Forget the potentially self-righteous and stuck up Kenin Spivak! I’ve got my eye on you Deron Colby! Mr. Colby is apparently a shining star! I would reconsider canceling my lawsuit with Brookstone Law Firm if they put Deron Colby on my case! Then I would just have Daron Colby argue some of the causes of actions while I file another lawsuit to have Mitchell J. Stein argue the other causes of action. Yah! That’s the ticket! I think we call that hedging ones bets! I am meatball baby! And I don’t mean Mabye! (Wink)

What was the result of the hearing on June 6th, 2011? Well, THE JUDGE GRANTED THE INJUNCTION TO STOP THE BANK FROM TAKING HER HOME! – Click here

Paging Mr. Colby! Paging Mr. Colby! Mr. Colby, please report t0 the Honorable Judge John Wright at the Court of Public Opinion.

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Hi John:

I am Robert John (Jack) Wright. I heard about your case quite some time ago. Today, I was sent a link to your site and wanted to introduce myself.

It took Bank of America, Bear Stearns and EMC Mortgage 10-years and well in excess of $1 million to steal my $139K home. Why would anyone do such a thing?

After Congressional hearings and investigations that discovered faked documents were used to take people’s homes, I went to my county land records. There I found forged documents have been filed against my property since 2000. These certified documents clearly demonstrate that Bank of America and EMC Mortgage never owned my property. I also discovered through my expert that it appears my loan was intentionally destroyed on or before 1991 due to fraud in the origination. How BA got the data is still unknown.

I wish you the best of luck and hope you never give up.

Regards,

Jack Wright

Why Did the Banks Need to Falsify and Forge Fabricated Documents?

Piggybankblog posted on 01/06/11

Picture posted by Piggybankblog

Cross linked story with livinglies article

The investors who purchased David Stern’s foreclosure mill have taken the extraordinary step of announcing publicly that they had been duped into buying a “criminal enterprise.” Obviously they didn’t want to get caught up in the dragnet of prosecutors looking for convictions. Nobody would spend $60 million like these investors did and then announce to the world that not only was it worthless, it was worse than worthless. It turns out that once they owned it they discovered that the entire enterprise was based upon criminal and other illegal or improper acts. It will soon be obvious that virtually all the foreclosure mills operated identically to Stern because they were owned and operated by the same people.

Those criminal acts were all about pushing foreclosures through the system. The end result of foreclosure is that somebody gets the house upon entry of a “credit bid” which is to say that they don’t pay cash, they just submit a “bid” based upon the fact that the property was the collateral for money that was due them. Since Stern was not taking the homes, and it is obvious that others were taking the homes, the question is why did they need to go through all those gyrations and subject themselves to prison time if the mortgages were legitimate?

I think the question answers itself. No Bank would require, allow or promote practices that were criminal acts in order to foreclose on an otherwise legitimate mortgage, note and obligation. The only reason why criminal acts were required was that the mortgages and foreclosures were a sham. At this point, with all the publicity about robo-signing, surrogate signing, forgeries, fabrications, back-dating etc., and the Banks’ protestations that these are the result of paperwork problems that emerged as a consequence of the volume of foreclosures, the Banks have had more than adequate time and opportunity to prove their case — that the mortgages were legitimate and the foreclosures were proper, subject only to resolving some minor paperwork errors.

That they have not done so corroborates the point I made 4 years ago. In most cases, at the time the mortgage documents were signed at “closing” the originator showing on the note and mortgage was not owed one cent — because they never made the loan. The originator was a paid straw-man. Somebody else made the loan but the paperwork does not even hint at that fact. That means the paperwork refers to a transaction with the originator that never occurred. The intermediaries who created this scheme made tons of money without reporting or accounting to either the investors or the borrowers. So it looks like the loan is still outstanding and due when in fact it has been paid several times over. Foreclosures only represented another payment in addition to the other multiple payments of the loan.

The actual source of the loan, as I have stated for years, was a group of institutional investors who were induced into buying bogus mortgage bonds thus creating a pool of money. The investment bankers took a huge bite out of that pool before they started funding mortgages. They did it contrary to the expectations and understanding of the investors and the ratings agencies. It was like buying a new car: as soon as you drive off the lot you lose a substantial amount of equity because now it is a used car. In this case, the Banks drove the money off a cliff and the investors were lucky to receive a few cents on the dollar they invested.

The fact that the mortgage documents refer to a transaction that never took place should be interpreted as a fatal defect in the documents as well as violating deceptive lending laws on the Federal (TILA) level and state level. That defect means or should be interpreted to mean that there is no lien on any of those homes and it can’t be corrected without getting a signature from the homeowner or a court order clearing title. The Banks know as much as I do about all this. In fact they know more than I do and they know exactly how to clear title.

They couldn’t go back to the homeowner because the homeowner now knew what was unknown at closing — that the deal was toxic and stupid and couldn’t work. The Court would enter the order the Banks required if they proved that the requirements of law had been met in establishing a mortgage loan. They can’t. So they are left with (a) an unsecured PAID loan to an unknown creditor and (b) liability for fraud. And they can’t fix it.

So they started foreclosing and in order to do so they needed to finesse the borrowers and the Court system with documents that looked right but were pure fabrication. Millions of these foreclosures took place and the Judges who rubber-stamped them never bothered to look at whether the paperwork actually made sense. Now, like to or not, all those foreclosures need to be reviewed for fatal errors. And homeowners, getting wise to the fact that they might still legally own homes they were kicked out of years ago, are visiting lawyers to see what can be done to recover the property. My guess, is that the tide has turned. That means homes are going to be returned to homeowners. In turn that means the value attributed to the mortgage backed securities have also been false and that requires a significant write-down of non-existent assets.

The write-down of assets on the balance sheets of the Banks (which after all are not really banks) will diminish their capital to a point well under the reserve requirements by any standards whether FED, Basil or otherwise. The only real question left is whether we will act as a nation of laws or of men. If we are a nation of laws the fraudulent transfer of wealth from the populace to the banks will be reversed and the economy will start humming again. If we are a nation of men, then we must recognize that a coup d’etat has occurred and we no longer have the government or the society we thought we had.

“This is a peaceful demonstration where dramatic license is used in an abstract way. Please be advised that nothing in this protest is to be construed or defined as suggesting that there will be a consequence or penalty given if such protest does not produce a result. There will be absolutely no consequence issued whatsoever. Please contact me right away with any concerns that there is anything on my blog to suggest otherwise. “ – disclaimer

Head of (OCC) Office of The Comptroller of The Currency —John Walsh Bank Owned?

Piggybankblog — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 20:23:44 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .
.
.

Head Of Comptroller of the Currency – Does He Work For The Banks?

John Walsh became acting Comptroller of the Currency on August 15, 2010.

Prior to joining the OCC, Mr. Walsh was the Executive Director of the Group of Thirty, a consultative group that focuses on international economic and monetary affairs. He joined the Group in 1992, and became Executive Director in 1995. Mr. Walsh served on the Senate Banking Committee from 1986 to 1992 and as an International Economist for the U.S. Department of the Treasury from 1984 to 1986. Mr. Walsh also served with the Office of Management and Budget as an International Program Analyst, with the Mutual Broadcasting System, and in the U.S. Peace Corps in Ghana.

Mr. Walsh holds a masters in public policy from the Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (1978), and graduated magna cum laude from the University of Notre Dame in 1973. He lives in Catonsville, Maryland. He is married with four children.

Does he work for the banks? Let’s take a look!

Treasury Criticizes OCC Publicly on

Pre-Emption in

Dodd-Frank

June 29th, 2011

The Treasury Department, not exactly hero to the consumer in the Obama era, is so incensed by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s draft rule on Dodd-Frank consumer protection that they took the rare step of publicly criticizing the fellow regulator:

The extent to which states can trump federal regulations and enforce their own rules against national banks was a flash point in the writing of Dodd-Frank and one that divided Democrats. Early versions of the legislation would have given states broad powers to regulate banks, a position supported by the Treasury. National regulators, including the OCC, were criticized during the financial crisis for shielding banks from tougher rules put in place by states, especially those regulating consumer products, including mortgages.

In the end, lawmakers scaled back the proposed state powers after being pressured by centrist Democrats, and the intent of the final legislation remains a matter of dispute. Its supporters say the final law raised the bar for banks that wanted to argue they needed an exemption from state laws. Banks argue the law essentially preserved the current standard the OCC uses to determine when federal law trumps state regulation.

The OCC’s rule under question asserts that all of its previous decisions to shield banks from specific state laws remain valid even though Dodd-Frank revised the standard by which the regulator must make those determinations. The Treasury argues the OCC has ignored the law’s language.

Specifically, Treasury General Counsel George Madison said that the OCC draft rule “is inconsistent with the plain language of the statute and its legislative history.” OCC offered a mild comment saying that they “appreciate the important points raised in the comments submitted by Treasury” and would take them under advisement.

That’s a big blow-off. And this whole circumstance is quite incredible. If any one regulator can be blamed for the financial crisis, it would be OCC, who used federal pre-emption laws to stop states looking into incidents of mortgage fraud. If states would have been allowed to go further prosecuting subprime lenders, there would have been a counter-balance to the urging of Wall Street to book more loans, regardless of the underwriting. This of course led to the housing bubble and the inevitable crash. OCC was practically acting on orders from the big banks they regulated when they stopped state regulators and kept money pouring into the casino. Now they want to do it all over again by ignoring federal statutes to the contrary.

This is not the first time recently that Acting OCC Director John Walsh has been criticized for his cozy relationship to the banks. Last week he gave a speech in London criticizing what he views as too-large capital requirements. This prompted several Senate Democrats to call for his replacement, including Sherrod Brown. Walsh is a holdover from the Bush Administration. His former boss John Dugan, a bank lobbyist, was the head of the OCC until his term expired almost a year ago, in August 2010 (Dugan, by the way, pops up in the WSJ article, saying that Walsh’s speech “could not have been a more moderate, sensible, thoughtful speech in my opinion”). The President has not named a replacement.

Not only that, but the Treasury Department APPOINTED Walsh and could replace him at any time, regardless of whether or not there was a nominee. This is a bank lobbyist’s former chief of staff regulating the nation’s top banks, and clearly siding with them, at a time when key rules are being written on financial reform. - click here

Does the Piggybankblog council find Walsh guilty or not guilty for working for the banks?

(Above youtube not part of actual article)

.
Unsurprisingly, the banks support OCC’s interpretation of Dodd-Frank, which very explicitly ignored the law entirely.

Louise Story has more on this. It’s truly revolting that Walsh still has an office.

The Comptroller of the Currency is the chief executive of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which supervises approximately 2,000 national banks and federal savings associations as well as 50 federal branches and agencies of foreign banks in the United States. These institutions comprise nearly two-thirds of the assets of the commercial banking system. The Comptroller also is a director of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and NeighborWorks® America.

Mr. Walsh joined the OCC in October 2005 and previously served as Chief of Staff and Public Affairs. – Original source

Therefore, in the end, it appears that it is not only the banks that we must hold accountable, but also the regulatory agencies that might be in bed with them too. This is because the simple fact is that the OCC is a government created agency that was built to protect bank customers. So if they are unable to do that to our satisfaction, I am guessing that makes them a big waste of taxpayer money. However, I wonder if Mr. Walsh likes Robert Cordry? Let’s find out by clicking here

Looks like we might have another piggy nose coming for the Wall of Shame.

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

John’s BofA Daily Blog

Piggybankblog — Wed, 25 Jan 2012 16:43:03 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .

Since June 2010

103,165 Visitors

.

February 6th, 2012

Last Thursday (February 2nd) was to be the second demurrer court hearing for the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit. Brookstone Law Firm made it past the first demurrer, but now there is apparently a second demurrer hearing because Brookstone Law Firm added many more hybrid causes of action to the complaint. I heard that Brookstone Law Firm appeared with the usual entourage of high caliber attorneys on our behalf, but that Stuttering Stuart appeared at court all alone. This is why I am guessing that Stuttering Stuart might have felt a little intimidated walking up to the court, after you consider that people from the Brookstone entourage were both in front of and behind Stuttering Stuart walking into the courthouse. He must have felt as if he was going to get jumped. I am also guessing that Stuttering Stuart must have felt even more uncomfortable after he realized that one of the attorneys in the Broosktone entourage used to work with Stuttering Stuart. At any rate, the judge did not show up. Stuttering Stuart insisted on waiting until the originally scheduled judge returned. Chicken! Therefore, the demurrer hearing was rescheduled for today. I will be giving further details in tomorrow’s blog.

Poor Stuttering Stuart must have felt all by himself that day in court.

Did you wa-wa-watch the whole youtube?

Brookstone Law Firm has announced a new shining star that will be representing all the plaintiffs in the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit. That shining star is Attorney Deron Colby. You remember Attorney Deron Colby don’t you? Attorney Deron Colby was the attorney who was able to convince the Honorable Judge Matz to pay attention to the title and securitization report. This would result in Judge Matz actually asking Attorney Deron Colby if he could educate him on where the Deed of Trust went vs. the Note by making a chart. This is because Judge Matz said that he thought there was a “pervasive confusion” about to whom the plaintiffs might owe the money too, while it seemed to be a “vexing problem” that “clearly seemed in favor of the homeowners or the borrowers.” Judge Matz said that the case could be a “potential precedent-setting matter” used by other judges, in which Judge Matz stated for the record: “I want no efforts taken from here on forward, until this matter is considered more carefully, to throw these homeowners out of their residences, assuming that they’re currently there. I can make all the necessary findings. I’ll do so in a sweeping way that, based upon the current state of the Court’s – of the pleadings and the court’s recognition, the usual factors in weighing injunctive relief, especially the irreparability of the injury the public interests, clearly favor the homeowners or the borrowers.” – The Hornorable Judge Matz is now a WALL OF FAME WINNER here at Piggybankblog.com.

The result would be that the Honorable Judge Matz would grant the TRO to the homeowner, while Mr. Colby’s case would even make it to West Law: Click here Making it to West Law is BIG POTATOES! That is why Attorney Deron Colby’s case would prove that Deron Colby is certainly a power to be reckoned with. It is also why Attorney Deron Colby representing all of the plaintiffs in the Wright et al vs. Bank of America lawsuit has proven to be an asset to Brookstone beyond any streatch of the imagination. Attorney Deron Colby featured in Youtube: click here

Deron M. Colby Agreed To Represent Plaintiffs in Wright Lawsuit – Who is Deron Colby?

Deron Colby has extensive experience as counsel for residential and commercial mortgages, income-producing real estate, start-up enterprises and small businesses. He has represented clients in disputes before state and federal courts and numerous non-judicial forums including federal and state regulatory agencies, arbitrations and mediations. His litigation background includes securities and real estate litigation, contract disputes, partnership and corporate dissolutions, defending against shareholder derivative lawsuits and other related business disputes.

Mr. Colby has also acted as a securities expert in litigation matters, including matters involving the Sarbanes Oxley Act. Prior to joining Brookstone Law, he formed Altor Law Group, APC, in 2008 to provide loan workout services to commercial and residential property owners. He was a founding member and partner of MC Law Group, a business law and securities firm where he advised numerous corporations in the process of “going public” and negotiated numerous multi-million dollar mergers and acquisitions. He also worked with Abrams Garfinkel Margolis Bergson, LLP as managing partner of their Orange County office focusing on corporate, securities and business law, including business and real estate litigation.

He was admitted to practice law in California in 1998 and joined the firm of Stepp & Beauchamp, LLP, where he represented hundreds of start-up enterprises in matters ranging from corporate formation to raising operating capital to taking companies public and all business litigation matters. Mr. Colby is admitted to the American Bar Association, the California State Bar Association, the Los Angeles Bar Association and the Orange County Bar Association. He earned his law degree from Western State University, College of Law and his undergraduate degree from California State University in Fullerton.

Educational Background:

JD – Western State University, College of Law, Fullerton, CA
BA – California State University, Fullerton, CA

Bar Associations:

American Bar Association
California State Bar Association
Los Angeles Bar Association
Orange County Bar Association

You Deron Colby! You! You have a gift my friend!

.
All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

February 3rd, 2012

Breaking News: Schneiderman sues J.P. Morgan and Bank of America, among others - Attorney General Eric Schneiderman filed suit today against a handful of the nation’s biggest banks for their role in a shared electronic registry system that served as the nominal holder of mortgages across the country.

The suit alleges that J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, Wells Fargo and others used the registry, called MERS, to subvert the usual process for tracking property transfers.

“The banks created the MERS system as an end-run around the property recording system, to facilitate the rapid securitization and sale of mortgages,” Schneiderman said in a statement. “Once the mortgages went sour, these same banks brought foreclosure proceedings en masse based on deceptive and fraudulent court submissions, seeking to take homes away from people with little regard for basic legal requirements or the rule of law.”

Schneiderman, who was named to co-chair a federal mortgage investigation unit last month, has previously criticized the recording practices of MERS, which holds about half of the nation’s home loans.

MERS’ recording practices, which included “robo-signing,” were among the issues in a proposed 50-state settlement to which Schneiderman objected last year.

The complaint was filed in state court in Brooklyn, by attorneys in Schneiderman’s office, and does not appear to have been in conjunction with the new team of federal investigators and attorneys that Schneiderman now has at his disposal.

But the suit should reassure some of Schneiderman’s liberal supporters that his aggressive pursuit of improper mortgage practices hasn’t been tempered by his inclusion in the administration’s task force. – captialnewyork.com

His name is Eric Schneiderman AND HE IS FIGHTING BACK!

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

I am John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

February 2nd, 2012

There are many people out there that are wondering what the success rate of being granted a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order) to stop the bank from fraudclosing on your home is. A TRO is basically asking the court to enjoin or stop the foreclosure proceedings until a judge can hear your reasons as to why the foreclosure should not proceed. You must convince the judge that you will suffer “irreparable injury” if the judge does not stop the foreclosure. However, of course you will suffer “irreparable injury“ if the foreclosure takes place, which is why that is not the only question in the judge’s mind. The question is if it is a “legitimate foreclosure” or “illlegitimate fraudclosure” instead. The question is if the obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument. The question is if the person seeking enforcement (the bank) does not have the rights of a holder in due course. The question is if the obligor (homeowner) proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument. ( U.C.C. provision, U.C.C. §3-305(c) ) What is the likelihood of there being good reason for a TRO being granted in your situation? VERY LIKELY! This is after you consider that it is common knowledge that Wall Street bundled up thousands of loans together to sell resulting in multiple trusts with multiple beneficiaries. - click here

Nevertheless, we are not asking much for a TRO while a crime is in progress. That is why it is time to start occupying courts that refuse a TRO to a homeowner while we say this:

.
.

The judges need to understand that no rock shall be left unturned in this fight.

I submit exhibit A for evidence of this court – click here

Sit down Mr. Chalfant! You are now in my courtroom! The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

Here we come!

(Youtube or blog is not to suggest threat. Non-Violent legal protest disclaimer)

The whole world is watching!

That’s how we do things in this department. (Wink)

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

February 1st, 2012

There are many attorneys out there that have decided to take on the banks with this issue. It does not necessarily mean they are the right attorney to take on banks though, because I believe that it takes more than just knowledge of the legal system to give these bank attorneys a run for their money. (No pun intended) (Wink) This is because it takes a very confident attorney to not be intimidated by the bank attorney’s psychological warfare tactics and arrogance. The attorney you have should have absolute confidence when going up against the bank attorneys, because the bank attorneys will probably try to bully them with psychological warfare. In my opinion, the first thing that the bank attorneys seem to do is use character assignation attempts of your attorney in court, while they try to dirty up your attorneys credibility with irrelevant arguments before the judge. They will try to turn your mortgage hearing into a full blown trial about your attorney, instead of just sticking to the arguments in your lawsuit. Stuttering Stuart tried to bring up the past of my very first attorney that I had with my very first lawsuit in court years ago before I was with Brookstone Law Firm. I remember reading page after page of Stuttering Stuart’s response to my lawsuit, where he actually seemed to only talk about the complaints he had seen online regarding this past law firm that had been representing me at the time. I remember spitting my drink out laughing, because it was page after page after page of his potentially disgruntled feelings towards my attorney at the time. I thought the firm sent me the wrong lawsuit to read, because there was very little about me or my situation in his response. It seemed that Stuttering Stuart might be trying to use a character assignation attempt of my attorney for their main defense, instead of isolating the main part of their response on the merits of my causes of action. I mean who cares that it could have been anyone in the world who entered those complaints online about my attorney, because for all we know, it could have been Stuttering Stuart himself who put them online. However, if former President Bill Clinton were my attorney, I am guessing that Stuttering Stuart might make it a point to mention to the judge that my attorney was accused of receiving a blow job in the White House. I know! I know! Like Stuttering Stuart never got a……never mind. I know! I know! Like Stuttering Stuart never gave a……never mind.

At any rate, now you understand why it was rather unfortunate for Stuart to stutter that day I was in court years ago, because I was sitting there in the courtroom giggling my little ass off when he did. I remember it like it was yesterday, because one of my supporters said that she almost jumped up in the courtroom and yelled “I give up! Bank of America can have my fucking house! Please just make Stuart stop stuttering!” Another supporter was making fart noises with her mouth because her hand was over it trying to stop from laughing at him in court. Then another supporter had begun to pray for him, because she was religious and thought that he had some kind of disability. However, my favorite supporter just said under his breath “Asshole,” because he had no sense of humor about Stuart potentially trying to help cover up the fact that the bank was trying to potentially steal his house. So we all had the church giggles in court, until my all my supporters and I began to look at one another with concern at some point. This is because Stuart seemed to be stuck stuttering for longer than the average person, in which me and the other supporters began to lean forward in our chairs to look at one other with confusion on our face. I even considered maybe running up and using the Heimlich maneuver, until one of the supporters reminded me that Stuart might sue me for trying to save him from himself. I would have felt sorry for him, if this was not the same asshole who was trying to help the bank potentially steal a home they would not end up owning the debt on. Which by the way, I think the banks have a real problem here criminally for several reasons. You see if they are able to prove that they own my debt, I will owe them money. However, if I prove they do not own the debt, I will have proven that they have been trying to use extortion to get money out of me. That is why I will be filing criminal charges against them when I win.

Nevertheless, I suggest that all of you should make sure that your attorney has balls before you retain them. This is because I assure you that the Bank of Bullying America attorneys will try and use intimidation tactics with your attorney, in which the worst thing that can happen is that your attorney goes running away with their tail between their legs the minute the bank attorneys show their dirty trick playing teeth. That is why I say that having an attorney with knowledge does not always mean that they are effective in helping you fight the banks. Unfortunately, knowledge without balls is no good. Neither are balls without knowledge. This is why you must make sure that your attorney has both knowledge and balls. Otherwise, you will find yourself all dressed up with nowhere to go, if your attorney is not figuratively talking to you like Sean Connery is talking to this guy in the youtube below.

Non-violent protest disclaimer

In conclusion, I know many of you are afraid. However, I never want you to be afraid. I want you to try really hard not to be. You see they need your fear to exist. I am not only talking about the seen world. I am talking about the unseen world too. That is why I am here to show you that the only thing you have to fear with this is fear itself, while I will try my very hardest to help you find your hope in our time together. But you can use mine until then.

“In that day, it is not what you write that they shall follow. It is your hope.”

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

January 31st, 2012

I was speaking to someone yesterday that had reported her bank to several various federal agencies for committing fraud with her mortgage. Her situation is not much different than mine with Bank of Deceiving America, because her title and securitization search with National Mortgage Investigation would also result in proving that the foreclosing bank did not own the debt. This is because her report showed that there was also an example of multiple trusts with multiple beneficiaries existing, which means that it would be totally impossible for the fraudclosing bank to actually be the owner of the debt. She said that the problem was that the federal agents she had spoken to were not really educated on topic. This is because the federal agent could not understand why the other alleged owners of the debt were not trying to collect from the homeowner, if her bank were not the legitimate owner of the debt. It is a pretty good question, but she also had a pretty good answer, because she told the agent that it was because it was securitized. This means that they had already been paid off by the insurance. In her case the loan was actually paid off by the insurance three times, while the fraudclosing bank was now seeking to be paid a fourth time from the homeowner or insurance. I think it is insurance fraud, which is why I also will be reporting Bank of Deceiving America to all the federal agencies with my loan. That is because I stand ready to pursue any and all legal remedies afforded to me by the law, which may involve criminal prosecution of the bank.

In conclusion, the American people shall show you the same mercy that you showed us in the day of our disaster Bank of Destroying The American Dream. In that day we shall pour twice the measure into that cup you were about to have us drink from. Yes! I say twice the measure!

Youtube below: “THEY CAN’T TAKE YOUR HOUSE!” and “If the foreclosure was illegal, the borrower should be able to get their deed and their home back from the bank.”

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

January 30th, 2012

Some of you might have noticed that I had taken Saturday and Sunday off from writing a daily blog. This is because my tracker shows me that most of you read my blog during the week, in which I thought it would be more reasonable to just write Monday through Friday from now on. This is because even though I have been writing a daily blog practically every day for nearly two years now, and though I enjoy it very much, I have to admit that I find myself sometimes feeling a little drained from it at times. Therefore, please be advised that I will be taking Saturdays and Sundays off from now on.

The results of my break of title and securitization check came back yesterday. The people at National Mortgage Investigation said that it was about as easy to find as picking up tiddlywinks with their butt cheeks, but at the end of the day, it appears they were able to connect the dots of this potential crime scene. They now believe that I have enough evidence to prove in court that there has indeed been a break in the chain of title. Now that might not exactly mean that I do not still owe the money that I borrowed, but it does mean that I do not owe it to Bank of Defrauding America. It also does not mean that they have the right to fraudclose on my home because U.C.C. provision, U.C.C. §3-305(c) says: “An obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument if the person seeking enforcement of the instrument does not have rights of a holder in due course and the obligor proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument.” That means I found the lucky golden Wonka ticket! – click here

As one bankruptcy attorney after another has discovered, this anonymity provided by MERS is now working against the lenders in court. In order for these lenders to foreclose, the chain of title must be established. The position of MERS in the chain of title, acting as a nominee for the actual owner, breaks that chain and prevents the lender from foreclosing.

One of the recent decisions on this subject came from the California bankruptcy court on May 20, 2010 where it was held that MERS could not foreclose as a nominee and that Citibank could not collect on its claim. This ruling, and others before it, has bankruptcy lawyers scrambling to see if MERS is a party to their clients’ mortgages before filing bankruptcy or taking other measures. The larger implication is the possibility that, with MERS breaking the chain of title, lenders face either a difficult or impossible path to foreclosing on homes under these circumstances.

If you are facing foreclosure, you may have another option to filing bankruptcy and your position may be much stronger than you think. Consulting with a bankruptcy attorney can provide the means to forestalling and/or preventing foreclosure or the need for filing bankruptcy. – actual article

See you in bankruptcy court Stuttering Staurt. (Wink)

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

.
.

Click here for John’s Older Daily Blogs (01/29/12 to 01/03/12)

Top Justice officials connected to mortgage banks – Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer

Piggybankblog — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:41:52 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... . .

Insight: Top Justice officials connected to mortgage banks

Piggybankblog posted on 01/20/12

Cross linked story with reuters.com

(Reuters) – U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder and Lanny Breuer, head of the Justice Department’s criminal division, were partners for years at a Washington law firm that represented a Who’s Who of big banks and other companies at the center of alleged foreclosure fraud, a Reuters inquiry shows.

The firm, Covington & Burling, is one of Washington’s biggest white shoe law firms. Law professors and other federal ethics experts said that federal conflict of interest rules required Holder and Breuer to recuse themselves from any Justice Department decisions relating to law firm clients they personally had done work for.

Both the Justice Department and Covington declined to say if either official had personally worked on matters for the big mortgage industry clients. Justice Department spokeswoman Tracy Schmaler said Holder and Breuer had complied fully with conflict of interest regulations, but she declined to say if they had recused themselves from any matters related to the former clients.

Reuters reported in December that under Holder and Breuer, the Justice Department hasn’t brought any criminal cases against big banks or other companies involved in mortgage servicing, even though copious evidence has surfaced of apparent criminal violations in foreclosure cases.

The evidence, including records from federal and state courts and local clerks’ offices around the country, shows widespread forgery, perjury, obstruction of justice, and illegal foreclosures on the homes of thousands of active-duty military personnel.

In recent weeks the Justice Department has come under renewed pressure from members of Congress, state and local officials and homeowners’ lawyers to open a wide-ranging criminal investigation of mortgage servicers, the biggest of which have been Covington clients. So far Justice officials haven’t responded publicly to any of the requests.

While Holder and Breuer were partners at Covington, the firm’s clients included the four largest U.S. banks – Bank of America, Citigroup, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo & Co – as well as at least one other bank that is among the 10 largest mortgage servicers.

DEFENDER OF FREDDIE

Servicers perform routine mortgage maintenance tasks, including filing foreclosures, on behalf of mortgage owners, usuallygroups of investors who bought mortgage-backed securities.

Covington represented Freddie Mac, one of the nation’s biggest issuers of mortgage backed securities, in enforcement investigations by federal financial regulators.

A particular concern by those pressing for an investigation is Covington’s involvement with Virginia-based MERS Corp, which runs a vast computerized registry of mortgages. Little known before the mortgage crisis hit, MERS, which stands for Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, has been at the center of complaints about false or erroneous mortgage documents.

Court records show that Covington, in the late 1990s, provided legal opinion letters needed to create MERS on behalf of FannieMae, Freddie Mac, Bank of America, JP Morgan Chase and several other large banks. It was meant to speed up registration and transfers of mortgages. By 2010, MERS claimed to own about half of all mortgages in the U.S. — roughly 60 million loans.

But evidence in numerous state and federal court cases around the country has shown that MERS authorized thousands of bank employees to sign their names as MERS officials. The banks allegedly drew up fake mortgage assignments, making it appear falsely that they had standing to file foreclosures, and then had their own employees sign the documents as MERS “vice presidents” or “assistant secretaries.”

Covington in 2004 also wrote a crucial opinion letter commissioned by MERS, providing legal justification for its electronic registry. MERS spokeswoman Karmela Lejarde declined to comment on Covington legal work done for MERS.

It isn’t known to what extent if any Covington has continued to represent the banks and other mortgage firms since Holder and Breuer left. Covington declined to respond to questions from Reuters. A Covington spokeswoman said the firm had no comment.

Several lawyers for homeowners have said that even if Holder and Breuer haven’t violated any ethics rules, their ties to Covington create an impression of bias toward the firms’ clients, especially in the absence of any prosecutions by the Justice Department.

O. Max Gardner III, a lawyer who trains other attorneys to represent homeowners in bankruptcy court foreclosure actions, said he attributes the Justice Department’s reluctance to prosecute the banks or their executives to the Obama White House’s view that it might harm the economy.

But he said that the background of Holder and Breuer at Covington — and their failure to act on foreclosure fraud or publicly recuse themselves — “doesn’t pass the smell test.”

Federal ethics regulations generally require new government officials to recuse themselves for one year from involvement in matters involving clients they personally had represented at their former law firms.

President Obama imposed additional restrictions on appointees that essentially extended the ban to two years. For Holder, that ban would have expired in February 2011, and in April for Breuer. Rules also require officials to avoid creating the appearance of a conflict.

Lanny Breuer on 60 minutes below:

United States Deputy Attorney General James Cole – Worked for Bank Law Firm – Bryan Cave LLP

Piggybankblog — Fri, 20 Jan 2012 19:05:01 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .

United States Deputy Attorney General

James Cole

Written by John Wright

November 17th, 2011

I was thinking yesterday that it would be funny to call 911 to report that someone is trying to steal my home. Why not? We call them when someone tries to steal our car for crying out loud, in which I would think that a house would be far more valuable than a car. It would be absolutely hilarious to post the recording of the 911 operator’s response, even though I know they would not do anything about it. However, that is not the question here, because the question is why won’t the federal government do anything about the potentially irregular, fraudulent, and simply unsafe mortgage selling practices of maybe selling the same loan multiple times to multiple investors?

The answer might be because they used to work for the banks. I mean wouldn’t that suck to maybe find out that the United States Deputy Attorney General used work for one of the law firms CURRENTLY REPRESENTING Bank of Destroying The American Dream? How much would that suck? Well, you should be able to answer that question right now. This is because HE DID!

United States Deputy Attorney General James Cole was sworn in as the Deputy Attorney General on Monday, January 3, 2011. However, he entered private practice in 1992 and was a partner at the alleged Dirty Trick Playing Bryan Cave Law Firm from the year 1995 to 2010. - Click here

James Cole served as a court-appointed independent monitor to a large insurance company to establish and oversee corporate compliance programs and ensure it adhered to laws and regulations. He also counseled businesses on securities, regulatory, and criminal law issues

Mr. Cole first joined the Department in 1979 as part of Attorney General’s Honors Program and served for 13 years – first as a trial attorney in the Criminal Division, and later as the Deputy Chief of the Division’s Public Integrity Section, the office that handles investigation and prosecution of corruption cases against officials, and employees at all levels of government. At Public Integrity Mr. Cole tried a number of notable cases, including prosecution of a U.S. District Judge, a member of Congress, and a federal prosecutor.

While in private practice in 1995, Mr. Cole was tapped to serve as Special Counsel to the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. In that role, he led an investigation into allegations that former House Speaker Newt Gingrich had improperly used tax-exempt money for partisan purposes and misled the Committee in its inquiry. His investigation led to a bipartisan resolution that was approved by an overwhelming majority of the full House, and resulted in a formal reprimand of Speaker Gingrich and a requirement that he pay penalties.

Mr. Cole has been a member of the adjunct faculty at Georgetown University Law Center, teaching courses on public corruption law and legal ethics, and has lectured at Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government. He is a former chair of the American Bar Association (ABA) White Collar Crime Committee and served as the Chair Elect of the ABA Criminal Justice Section. He received his B.A. from the University of Colorado and his J.D. from the University of California-Hastings. (Information taken from DOJ page) DOJ Page

Dosen’t it suck to find out that the United States Deputy Attorney General used to work for the banks? Gee, do you think that he might still have some alliances to the potentially criminal Bank of Destroying America? Do you think that Stu-Stu-Stuttering Stuart ev-ev-ever has talked to Ja-Ja-James Cole?

Sounds like their might be a little conflict of interest going on if you ask me.

Things that make you go hmmmmmmm.

All Rise! The Honorable Judge John Wright has left The Courtroom of Public Opinion!

My name is John Wright AND I AM FIGHTING BACK!

Today’s daily blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

I need your help.

If you liked today’s blog, please give piggybankblog a donation

Three Ways To Avoid Foreclosure- Written by Fadie Hany Areny

Piggybankblog — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:34:39 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .

.
.

THREE WAYS TO STOP A FORECLOSURE SALE

Written by Fadie Hany Areny

January 17th, 2012

If you are facing a pending foreclosure sale which is right around the corner (next week or two), you must take action NOW to prevent this from getting any further into the process. It’s time to learn how to play defense and that’s what I am here to teach you. If you take a look at the last 5 years of this foreclosure crisis, the majority of borrowers have just allowed their alleged lenders to foreclose on them without putting up any fight. However, those days are now over and none of us are going to take this anymore. Each and every single day more of us continue to stand up for the fight, and each and every single day we continue to educate ourselves more and more. I am glad to say that since May 12, 2011, I have witnessed more and more borrowers stand up for the fight. No matter what anyone else says, I want you to know that this fight CAN be EASY if in fact you know how to build your case. Furthermore, the more investigating that you do and the more communicating (via telephone, letters, etc.) that you do with the alleged parties that are involved with your mortgage, the more evidence you will continue to build. It really is that easy, just contact them knowing that they lie each and every time and set them up, and you will catch them each and every time. The biggest key to all of this though is to stay organized and to make sure to document everything, record everything, and be persistent and you will find things that you never knew was possible.

Now, I did get a little side tracked there, so let’s get back to the three ways to stop a foreclosure sale. Before I begin I want you to know that you do have other options and that these are just a few options that I know can help you (none are guaranteed, but if done correctly will most likely help you stop your foreclosure sale). Again I do have to provide a disclaimer before I begin and I want all of my readers to know that I am not an Attorney, nor do I ever want to be an Attorney, and I am also not in any way shape or form practicing law, I am simply providing my experiences on this topic. SO, you have a foreclosure sale coming up and you want to know how to stop it? I can say that the best most efficient method I have seen work time and time again is bankruptcy because bankruptcy places a hold on everything until the bankruptcy is finished. Now of course bankruptcy is not for everyone and I would suggest to get the advice of a bankruptcy Attorney to see if bankruptcy may be a good option for you. Before you do though, please read through all of this so you can see the different types of bankruptcies and the different options you have in bankruptcy court, because believe it or not but before 2011, the majority of landmark cases in the United States of America in regards to the foreclosure crisis were won in bankruptcy court.

Many of you are probably reading this thinking to yourself “I don’t want to go through all of this and declare bankruptcy, my credit and everything will be ruined.” However, it should be noted that a foreclosure itself is almost as bad as a bankruptcy on your credit and so if you weigh the 2 options together, you may actually now realize after this article that bankruptcy is actually a real good method in the fight for your property. Again, please be advised that this is not for most of us, but for those who are thinking about it, it might be the best thing to happen to you. So Fadie why do you think bankruptcy is a method that may be helpful for a lot of borrowers? Simple, in bankruptcy court the rules are completely different then in civil court. For example the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Rule 3001 Proof of Claim states in paragraph (d) Evidence of perfection of security interest. “If a security interest in property of the debtor is claimed, the proof of claim shall be accompanied by evidence that the security interest has been perfected.”* This rule is very important to understand because it requires that the alleged lender provide the proof of claim and evidence that the security interest (your loan) has been PERFECTED. What is proof of claim? A written statement that sets forth a claim against a bankrupt debtor or the probate estate of a deceased debtor.* And what is perfected? Perfection in the context of bankruptcy means the procedure of making a creditor’s lien senior to other lien. Here a secured creditor takes certain steps to perfect their lien. On perfecting the lien the secured creditor’s lien becomes senior to other liens that arise after perfection. For example, recording a mortgage with the county recorder makes such mortgage perfect and such mortgage will be senior to any other mortgage that arises subsequent to the perfected mortgage.* So what does all of this mean? It means that your alleged lender would have to file fraudulent documents because 90% of ALL MORTGAGES created from 2001-2009 have evidence of errors, omissions, defects, violations, and frauds. Because 90% of ALL MORTGAGES were securitized, most security interests were never properly PERFECTED and there is no evidence of PERFECTION. This means there is also no evidence of PROOF OF CLAIM. So in this case, your alleged lender is unable to do anything because the loan was securitized and they are unable to provide the proof of claim, and if they do they are most likely entering fraud into the court. This is such a beautiful thing to do! I mean turning the tables and royally giving it to the banks and lending institutions is just so much fun!!!

Alright so let’s say you decided to file bankruptcy, what type of bankruptcy do you file? Well of course most people like to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy because it practically wipes everything off your record clean, however, if you are filing bankruptcy simply tosave your home or property then it is most likely best to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy. Again, please get the legal advice from a bankruptcy Attorney on this, but from my understanding if you file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy you are able to also file an “adversary proceeding” which is absolutely free to the debtor (you). What is an adversary proceeding? A lawsuit arising in or related to a bankruptcy case that is commenced by filing a complaint with the court. Yep that’s right! An adversary proceeding is like a normal civil action, but it is done in bankruptcy court under bankruptcy rules. This allows you to challenge the banks and lending institutions to provide proof of claim or proof of standing. In your filing and declaring of bankruptcy it is also smart to put your property as an unsecured debt because when you do this your alleged lender will complain, and once they complain they now will again have to prove that they have the proof of claim. This is another method of turning the tables on them and requiring that they proof up.

There are a few small details about bankruptcy that you should know if you are doing this Pro Se or if you just want to be equipped with knowledge about bankruptcy before you speak to your bankruptcy attorney. 1) bankruptcy has its own rules of court, 2) you are ineligible if you have in fact filed a bankruptcy in the last 7 years, 3) Chapter 7 bankruptcy is the worst way to file if you are interested in saving your property because you are forfeiting your rights in challenging your alleged lender because you cannot file for an adversary proceeding under Chapter 7, 4) unless you want to take the entire case in bankruptcy you should file for bankruptcy protection to buy you time (delay the foreclosure) and then dismiss it, and 5) most people use this method if they are unable to find “Evidence of Movement” in which the loan was not securitized and/or you do not have proof that the alleged lender is actually the servicer of the mortgage. In these cases it is most likely a good idea (again consult with an experience bankruptcy attorney) to continue a case in bankruptcy court because of the special bankruptcy rules, especially Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Rule 3001 (d). Remember that filing for bankruptcy will allow you to have more time to fight your alleged lender than if you had not declared bankruptcy. However, there are other options for those of you who have more time, are ineligible to declare bankruptcy, or simply just refuse to declare bankruptcy.

First things first, this option is for those of you who have a Mortgage Investigation and evidence of securitization in your loan because you must begin to initiate a civil action. This option is for all of you who are ready to file suit and to bring a civil action to either the district or circuit courts in your state. The purpose of doing this is of course to get a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to stop the foreclosure sale. Remember to get the advice of a professional Attorney before doing anything, but first you need to investigate the foreclosure laws of your State first*. The reason why you have to do this is because there is a difference between Non-Judicial Foreclosure and Judicial Foreclosure. If you live in a State that is Judicial then you are most likely already in court and instead of filing a new lawsuit you are going to have to challenge your alleged lender on the fact that they have no Legal Standing. However, if you are in a Non-Judicial State you are going to most likely have to file suit and sue your alleged lender.

Bringing a case to the courts or challenging your alleged lender on their Legal Standing must of course be based on evidence. This is why you need to hire National Mortgage Investigation to conduct for you a fully in-depth Mortgage Investigation which will uncover and unearth every piece of factual evidence possible. We have a 99.9% accuracy and success rating which is why the best, most elite Attorneys from all over the United States of America choose National Mortgage Investigation to provide their clients with fully executed Mortgage Investigations before bringing a cause of action(s) to the courts. Now what is the simplest form of evidence that you can bring to the court? It’s “Evidence of Movement” which is evidence showing the movement of your Note from one bank to another. An example of this would be, you closed with Mortgage Investment Lending Associates, Inc. who sells it to Countrywide Home Loans who then gets acquired by Bank of America who then securitizes the Note into Trust Series 2008-MI. Now your Deed of Trust names Mortgage Investment Lending Associates, Inc. as the Beneficiary or the Trustee, but Bank of America wants to foreclose on your property. This is an example of Evidence of Movement and of course getting a National Mortgage Investigation Mortgage Investigation will only give you more proven factual evidence for your case. Often times Bank of America will come to the court claiming “Your Honor, we have reacquired the Note and now have the right to foreclose.” If this happens in your case you must object on the following grounds:

Show the Chain of Title, if Bank of America securitized the loan, then they lost their right to enforce under 15 U.S.C. §1641(f)(2)* because the Servicer does not have the rights of a lender if it has acquired the Note for the purposes of the ease of administration. If Bank of America reacquired the loan that would mean that they reacquired it solely for the purposes of conducting the foreclosure.
Ask them to stipulate for the record whether or not the Note is part of a Pooling and Servicing Agreement, whether the Note has been securitized, and who “Trust Series 2008-MI” is. Then ask them if “Trust Series 2008-MI” is a REMIC (Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit).
If the loan has been securitized, you must also ask if they reacquired the Note as an unsecured debt in the Secondary Securities Market, and then ask them if they acting in the capacity of a debt collector as governed under 15 U.S.C. §1692a*.

One thing that you must remember is that this is fraud at its greatest and only the top elitist banksters know that this is all a scam. This is so much of a scam that most of the lender’s legal counsel has no idea that the scam is being perpetrated. Most legal counsels your attorney will go up against will be taking their client’s (alleged lender) word at face value and they will have been told that “we bought the Note back” and so they will accept that the bank in fact now has the right to foreclose. The problem here is that they have no right to foreclose because they are lying to everyone pretending that they have the right to actually foreclose. Remember to tell your Attorney that one of his/her arguments should be structured around showing Legal Standing and showing that the alleged lender is in fact the real and beneficial party of interest who has the right to enforce the Note, because they are in fact the wrong party trying to enforce the Note.

Another important piece of information to know is that there have been many cases out there that have been won that state in the simplest terms that the Mortgage/Deed of Trust must in fact follow the Note. So the party who controls the Note also controls the Mortgage/Deed of Trust according to these cases AND also according to your Mortgage/Deed of Trust (go to your Mortgage/Deed of Trust and look at paragraph 20 to see what I mean). I point this out because a lot of times the alleged lenders will try to lay claim on your title by showing ownership to your Mortgage/Deed of Trust without disclosing who the real and beneficial owner of the Note is. In the court of law this has been admissible UNLESS your Attorney knows how to object to this and unless your Attorney has case laws to quote from. Finding case laws should be fairly easy if your Attorney is part of the National Mortgage Investigation Power Attorney Network. We are in process of developing the best, most elite and knowledgeable group of Attorneys in all of the United States of America who share information with one another on the fly. This would mean if your Attorney is a Power Attorney within our Power Network, they are able to ask questions to the other Power Attorneys within the Network and get answers a lot quicker than if they are fighting the fight using their own research. It’s always nice to have a Cumulative Mind of Law on your side because there is a lot of powerful information out there that Attorneys need!

Nonetheless, going back to why filing suit is important to stop your foreclosure! When you first file suit your Attorney should also file a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) to get a temporary hold on the foreclosure sale which is granted by the court. Your Attorney will most likely have to file some kind of Motion/Order to get your case heard faster than normal if you are having your foreclosure sale within the next few weeks. Again your experienced Attorney will know much more about this than I do. What I do know though is when having a Mortgage Investigation from National Mortgage Investigation your chances of getting a Temporary Restraining Order granted is substantially higher than if you are filing a lawsuit without the Mortgage Investigation from National Mortgage Investigation.

Now on to the third option for getting a foreclosure sale stopped. Apply for a loan modification with your alleged lender. Disclaimer: there have been instances where an alleged lender has in fact denied the loan modification within a few days of applying so that way they can continue to foreclose on you. Furthermore, none of these options are guaranteed for anyone and you must always get PROFESSIONAL LEGAL ADVICE from an EXPERIENCED LEGAL PROFESSIONAL before you proceed forward. Anyways, loan modifications under HAMP actually are a good way to stop or delay a foreclosure, especially considering if it’s your first time it might take 3 months to get a denial or acceptance from your alleged lender. Keep in mind though we have seen denials in as little as a few days so this is one of those options that is seriously putting you at risk if you don’t proactively take other steps in stopping your foreclosure. If you are need if an Attorney please contact National Mortgage Investigation and we will provide you with a list of Power Attorneys within our Power Attorney Network that practice in your State. Also if you are in a State where we have yet to get Power Attorneys in, we will gladly interview and investigate Attorneys in your State to have them join our Power Attorney Network. If you have a great Attorney that you are using currently and you think they should become a part of National Mortgage Investigation’s Power Attorney Network please contact National Mortgage Investigation or call 1-877-751-2993 to discuss how to help us get your Attorney on board with our Power Attorney Network.

I hope you enjoyed this read today, and I truly hope this has helped many of you who are in the foreclosure process and are facing a foreclosure sale that is near. The key to everything is to get the best legal counsel to fight your fight. You need to learn how to interview your Attorneys to make sure you are getting the best Attorney for your case because this is the most important of all pieces to your puzzle. The second most important piece is to of course get a Mortgage Investigation from National Mortgage Investigation and to also develop your Post-Mortgage Investigation Game Plan to keep you on track. Thank you everyone for all the love and support and we thank all of the Piggybank Bloggers who have already purchased their Mortgage Investigations and we are looking forward to providing a Mortgage Investigation to every single one of you in your fight against your alleged lenders. If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to comment below!!!

Thank you and God bless you all, your families, your friends, your co-workers, and all your loved ones! And may God provide us all with the strength, knowledge, wisdom, guidance, evidence, and the pure truth to win ALL OF YOUR CASES. AMEN!

Sources

Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Rule 3001 – http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frbp/rule_3001

Proof of Claim – http://research.lawyers.com/glossary/proof-of-claim.html

Perfection – http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/perfection-bankruptcy/

Adversary Proceeding – http://dictionary.findlaw.com/definition/adversary-proceeding.html

Foreclosure Laws - http://foreclosurelaw.org/

15 U.S.C. §1641(f)(2) – http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/usc_sec_15_00001641

15 U.S.C. §1692a – http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode15/usc_sec_15_00001692—a000-.html

Todays blog brought to you by:

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

.

Leave questions below in the comment section and I will get back to you.

CALL TO ACTION – Time for some accountability! – Call your Senator in Support of these Bills

Piggybankblog — Wed, 18 Jan 2012 00:10:23 +0000

Nationalmortgageinvestigation.com

. ... .

CALL TO ACTION – Time for some accountability!!! – Call your Senator in Support of these Bills

January 13th, 2012

I’d like to personally say THANK YOU to all of the Property Defense Network team (especially Karen) and those Legislators, Attorneys, HomeOwners, Advocates, Blog Owners, etc. who assisted us in getting this in front our our legislators and now in the form of a Bill.

WE ARE MAKING PROGRESS!!!!

We have 2 bills to talk about and Support.

SB 6199 – AN ACT Relating to modifying the penalty for false swearing by a beneficiary; amending RCW 61.24.030, 9.38.020, and 9A.72.040; and 3 prescribing penalties.

See the full bill here http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6199&year=2011

RCW 61.24.030 (7):

“(ii) A declaration by the beneficiary made under the penalty of perjury stating that the beneficiary is the actual holder of the promissory note or other obligation secured by the deed of trust shall be sufficient proof as required under this subsection. A violation of this subsection (7)(a)(ii) is a class C felony as provided in RCW 9A.20.020 and 9A.20.021.”

Foreclosing servicers, trustees, and their affiliates, agents, etc. have been able to hide behind this declaration because there has been no penalty for falsely submitting documents. The courts have put the responsibly back on the WA Legislature in several Cases (Send us a request for examples) citing that the Legislature could have instituted damages or penalties. Well here is the Legislature attempting to do just that.

IT IS UP TO US TO SUPPORT OUR LEGISLATORS!!! CALL YOUR SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE –

Find your State Reps here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

SB 6070 – AN ACT Relating to recording residential real property; and amending RCW 61.24.030 and 65.08.070.

See the full bill here http://apps.leg.wa.gov/billinfo/summary.aspx?bill=6070&year=2011

RCW 61.24.030 (5):

That the deed of trust, including every assignment and transfer, has been recorded in each county in which the land or some part thereof is situated;

RCW 65.08.070 New Section (2):

(2) Every transfer and assignment of residential real property must be recorded in the office of the recording officer of the county where the property is situated. An instrument is deemed recorded the minute it is filed for record.

Another major problem here in WA is that there is no requirement under our recording acts that transfers of Deeds of Trust/Mortgages be recorded so that a homeowner can look at the public records to determine who the rightful owner of their Note is. This has also cost our Counties untold amounts of monies as, since it isn’t a requirement, the Banksters have been able to avoid these costs through the use of MERS. This has also caused untold amounts of issues with the reliability of our Land Titles.

It’s not time to celebrate. It isn’t law, YET, but it can be if you call, email, or write your legislator.

IT IS UP TO US TO SUPPORT OUR LEGISLATORS!!! CALL YOUR SENATOR AND REPRESENTATIVE –

Find your State Reps here: http://apps.leg.wa.gov/DistrictFinder/Default.aspx

We Washingtonians need these bills passed to protect our land titles and to hold the parties who are relying upon false and unauthorized documents in the effort to unlawfully steal our homes accountable.

A quick note to your Senator that says I support bill 6070 & 6199 is a good start. DO IT NOW!!! Thanks again to all those who helped in getting these bills submitted.

Please share this with EVERYONE YOU KNOW!!

Josh Auxier

Founder – Property Defense Network

Orginal Source