For Case Arguments

8/13/2019 For Case Arguments

1/7

1. n.fTrespass Unwanted, on November 11. 2011 at 3:32am said:Why the OCC settlement is not an option for me.Deed of trust names the trustee.Lender (on the Deed of Trust) must appoint a substitute trustee.If the sale is conducted by anyone other than the trustee named in the deed oftrust or a properly appointed substitute trustee, the sale is void.courtroom.com/uccrprop.pdfTrustee and Substitute Trustee.The deed of trust will have named a trustee. That individual may not be avdilableto actually conduct the foreclosure, however, and the lender must appoint asubstitute trustee.Such appointment must be made in strict compliance with the deed of trustterms. Failure to do so will make the attempted appointment invalid. Johns.on v.Koenig, 353 S.W.2d 478 (Tex. Civ. App. -Austin1962, writ refd n.r.e.). The deed of trust may also require that any substitutetrustee appointment be recorded. Check for such requirements in the deer oftrust and whether the lender has complied therewith.All such requirements regarding the substitute trustee must be met beforeposting. If the sale is conducted by anyone other than the trustee named i 1 thedeed of trust or a properly appointed substitute trustee, the sale is void.Pretender lenders had everything planned out, except the training of the IHWfirms (foreclosure mills) they hired, especially in non-judicial states.It was hard enough to find an attorney that knew real estate law to save a 1omefrom foreclosure, so these firms had no stringent procedures for doing the anksbidding.Now they are taking their time, retrieving documents, making sure paperw >rk isin order before proceeding, but they have two years of foreclosures where theybotched it literally and are in deep doo-doo.When the 50 state AGs started the investigation (an you know they don tinvestigate nothing if there is no wrongdoing), there were press releases hsued


2/7

by some. Texas AG press release said the banks violated the state constitution,property law, contract law, trust law, it was beautiful.oag.state. x us/oagNews/release.php?id=3500oag .state. x us/newspubs/releases/201 0/10051 0_sample_bank.p fWe are aware that Bank of America services a significant number of mortgagesin the State of Texas. It is likely that affidavits and other documents, such asassignments of deeds of trust and appointments of substitute trustees, with theissued described, above may have been used in connection with foreclosures inthe State of Texas. Regardless of whether the foreclosure was a nonjudicial oneor a judicial one in connection with a home equity loan, home equity line of creditIor reverse mortgage, if any of the practices described above were utilized Inestablishing Bank of America s authority to conduct the sale or obtain a coprtorder for a sale, such use would have been in a violation of Section 17.46(a) ofthe Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act; Section 392.304, Texas DebtCollectionsAct; Section 37.02, Texas Penal Code; Section 12.001, TexasProperty Code; Section 406.009, Texas Government Code; Texas Constitl tionArticle 16, Section 50; and/or Rule 736(1), Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, andthe document and therefore the foreclosure sale would have been invalid.There is more documented, it s a great read if you digest what is alleged. Thebanks ignored this. They continued to foreclose, and continued to evict, ar.d soldforeclosed homes even though this order told them not to.It was issued in October, I had been evicted from my property by the, but f1efollowing April they sold it, stuck it under Quicken Loans with is attached t MERS because I saw the documents on file for the supposed new owner. The violations and injuries stand until the homeowner enters a new contraCt.People jump to save their home with a mod with a bank who was not their lenderon the original mortgage. The only reason I can see OCC would want to havethose people between 2009 and 2010 who got a modification, is there must be amissing piece they need a signature for, and this review will give them thatmissing piece.There are pending foreclosures. I don t know why they won t just forgive tt.e debt.The theft of my home was botched so bad, that I kept track of everything c-1dsince I know the sale is void, I know I m not dealing with any time frame fc beingmade whole again. The bank can drag their feet, but someone is going to 1ave to


3/7

undo what was done.I am a peaceful inhabitant. I have a right to be here.Thou shalt not steal.Someone waged a financial war on me with no right to do so.I will be made whole.The meek will inherit the earth.Trespass Unwanted life corporeal State allodial jure divino in jure proprio


4/7

WATCH OUT BEFORE YOU BUY THAT NEXT PROPER '(.=TITLE ISSUESPosted on November 11 2011 by Neil Garfield

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

GET COMBO TITLE AND SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS CLICKHEREGRAVE PITFALLS IN BUYING A HOME TODAY

If you are paying cash, that is no protection against later claims of owners whonever legally lost title or gave title notwithstanding what is recorded in the titleregistry. Those documents if false would return the prior owner to title and .possession of the property. That would leave you literally out in the cold i ~ o u thome or the money you put into the deal. And as we have already seen, t le factthat a title company or even an ACTUAL lender (actually lending their ownmoney) is willing to close doesn't mean that title is clear. Both have beenconsisting violating basic underwriting standards of the industry for at least 15years.If there is or was one or more loans going back perhaps 10 15 years in the chaintitle, they were probably subject to some claim of securitization. If securitizationis an issue the plain truth is that the players in the securitization chain can't tellyou what you need to know about title. They just don't know because they hevercared. There is a big difference between

WHAT THEY SAID THEY I that would be the closing documents withthe borrower

WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO O that would be the c1osingdocuments with the investor- the securitization documentation

WHAT THEY ACTUALLY I that would be the actual money trail-'where it came from, where it went, or kept it, or passed it on, and who wasultimately receiving the bulk of the payments or proceeds of paymentsfrom the borrower, the servicer, other third parties, insurers or federalbailout.


5/7

Each of these factor into title or potential claims on title. each of these factor intoany foreclosure and subsequent sale. And ultimately each of these will need to becleared through signatures and recorded affidavits of all the possibleparticipants, a court order quieting title or both. ; _,,,.CASE N POINT: I know of a situation in Phoenix where the famed foreclosure millTiffany and Bosco is involved. There was a foreclosure and then there was a deedfrom husband to wife. Obviously that raises eyebrows. If there was a foreclosureand it was valid then the husband to wife deed is a wild deed and can be ignored.But the husband and wife deed is corroborated by the fact that one of them orboth were on the original deed and the original mortgage that was foreclosed. Sothe husband -wife deed is not clearly wild - it is questionable at best and atworst, part of the proof that the foreclosure sale was illegal, ineffective or invalid.Now the property went apparently from the party who submitted the successfulbid at an auction that may or may not have been authorized because it Wf Sordered or conducted by a Substitute trustee by virtue of a substitution o{trustee that may or may not be an authenticated document. And the Notice. >fDefault and Notice of Sale may or may not have named the actual creditor. Inmost cases, it does not appear that the substitution of trustee names the ac.tualcreditor, which is why the judicial states have a much larger backlog of .foreclosures than non-judicial where the pretender lenders get away withsubstituting fabricated paperwork in lieu of actual chain of title.Thus the highest probability is that if you are buying a residential piece of realestate, there are title questions that are overhanging the transaction. This is a badthing that endangers your investment and your plans but not so bad that it pan'tbe fixed. I think I would get an affidavit from Bosco saying that to his knowledgeand belief there are no facts, documents or circumstances under which anv thirdparty could claim an interest in the real property other than as stated in thecommitment- and that he is in a position to know. That affidavi t should b,executed in recordable form along with the Warranty Deed when they close.Considering what we know, an affidavit from the witnesses and notary saying thatBosco actually signed it would be in order as well and also executed inrecordable form and recorded as attachments to the deed. If they refuse to do theaffidavits, then watch out.The seller is said to be an LLC and the title company already wants to know whothat LLC is, who formed it and what chain of authority is present to convey title.There are a thousand reasons why title is being portrayed this way. But it is


6/7

possible that Bosco was the successful bidder, that Bosco created the LLC andthat Bosco named himself as Trustee. The conveyance from husband to wifeindicates an outstanding interest in the property. If the policy contains anexception for this conveyance i t is giant loophole in title and the insurance Thecommitment says they want details on the incorporation of the LLC. I would askfor those documents as well.But overall, this is not evidence, in and of itself that the whole thing is a sham.The 24 month period referred to in the commitment represents a common lookback period for the commitment. It doesn t mean that is all the work they will do. Ithink the whammy will come when they issue the actual policy. THAT will bmaterially different from this commitment. And they say so right in thecommitment.Leaving off Schedule A, considering the naming of the Seller and buyer later on,does not seem wrong and in fact is common practice so the commitment is notused in lieu of a policy. Many people if they read anything, read the commit.;nent.The commitment is basically a preview but not the real thing. The practice in theindustry is to issue the commitment with exculpatory language such that whenthey issue a policy that is materially different from the commitment, you probablywon t notice it.I think you must take the position that the title to this property is probablyhopelessly mired in doubt and clouds. But here is what you could do. You couldfile a quiet title action based upon the questions raised by the commitment, withcooperation of T&B et al and name everyone in the universe. After the time foranswers has come and gone, the defaults are entered and final judgment isentered. Then ti tle is clear. The burden of doing so SHOULD be on the e ~ l e r butthey might insist on you doing it yourself.The lawsuit should recite the fact that there are questions of title relating to,thesecuritization or attempted securitization of the loan. It should be served on thelast known servicer and the last lender . The lawsuit should occur BEFORE theclosing which means that the seller LLC should be the plaintiff. And the dealshould be that if the Judge doesn t sign the order, there is no deal and all moneyis refunded.If you follow this I believe that you will receive something practically nobody elsehas - clear t it le. As the title issues become more and more in the news, the factthat you received a clear title order from a Judge would increase bothmarketability AND price when you want to sell it. And remember, the Final


7/7

Judgment signed the judge must a) be clocked in with clerk who gives you acertified copy and then b) the certi fied copy recorded in the title registry of_thecounty in which the property is located. Do that as soon as you can lay hands onthe Judge s Final order.Check with a licensed at torney knowledgeable in real estate and title issues andwho has some working knowledge of securitization before you take any actionbased upon this article. This is for general information only and not meant asadvice on any particular case. You should not proceed with the purchase ofanything as important as a house without the assistance of an attorney licensedin the jurisdiction in which the property is located.

For Case Arguments

Documents