On Tuesday, September 26th, five of MAAPL’s bills will have a hearing before the Judiciary committee of the MA legislature. Please come to the State House and support these bills!
The following bills will be heard:
Foreclosure Review Division of Superior Court (S903/H3059) Sponsors: Sen. McGee & Rep. Gonzalez Face Sheet on this Bill ( PDF ) This Bill establishes a statewide, specialized division of Superior Court to adjudicate all aspects of foreclosure-related cases, instead of the several courts that now have jurisdiction over one or another aspect of such cases. The Foreclosure Review Division will be empowered to clear title to foreclosed properties, both for those foreclosed and for third-party purchasers, and will provide online and other assistance to pro se litigants. It will free up regular court dockets and promote judicial economy.
Clarifying Municipal Authority (S884/H1115) Sponsors: Sen. Lesser, Sen. Chandler, Sen. McGee and Rep. Tosado Fact Sheet on this Bill ( PDF ) The bill clarifies that municipalities can continue to exercise their health and safety powers in service of their residents even in the context of this foreclosure crisis. Worcester successfully ran a groundbreaking cash bond program for over 5 years and Lynn showed that pre-foreclosure mediation can result in mutually agreed upon affordable loan modifications leading to avoidance of foreclosure in 97% of cases.
Preventing Unnecessary Vacancies (S841/H956) Sponsors: Sen. Eldridge and Rep. Sanchez Fact Sheet on this Bill ( PDF ) This Bill requires a commercial purchaser of a foreclosed home to rent it to the “foreclosed” homeowner until the property is sold to a new owner-occupant. The former owners become tenants paying the HUD fair market rent for their units. Post-foreclosure tenants can be evicted only for just cause.
Real Estate Title Protection Act (H3500) Sponsors: Rep. Moran and Rep. Mark Fact Sheet on this Bill ( PDF ) This Bill protects real estate titles; its provisions ensure, for instance, that the mortgagor (borrower) can always tell who owns the mortgage, and require the Mortgage Note to be returned to the mortgagor, marked “Paid in Full,” upon payoff. It requires Registries of Deeds to record each mortgage in the names of the real parties in interest, that is, the mortgagor and lender. It institutes deadlines for recording assignments of mortgage and foreclosure deeds. Protecting marketable title will bolster business creation by facilitating entrepreneurs’ mortgages on their own homes; these historically have provided up to 70% of the credit for new U.S. businesses.
Judicial Foreclosure (S763/H2349) Sponsors: Sen. Brady and Rep. Smizik Fact Sheet on this Bill ( PDF ) This Bill requires foreclosure of 1-4 family homes to be conducted through a court action. A party wishing to foreclose must provide the legal documentation to prove to a judge that it is the mortgage-holder before it forecloses. With our present non-judicial foreclosures, the burden is on a wronged homeowner to get a judge to order the foreclosing party to produce this evidence. Judicial Foreclosure will prevent foreclosures by those with no authority to foreclose, and prevent clouds on title presently created during non-judicial foreclosures.
Mortgage Servicer’s Widespread Errors, Shortcuts, and Runarounds Cost Borrowers Money, Homes
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) today sued one of the country’s largest nonbank mortgage loan servicers, Ocwen Financial Corporation, and its subsidiaries for failing borrowers at every stage of the mortgage servicing process...
SO CLOSE! MAAPL is so close! We are within $2,630 of our $7,400* goal to complete the lawsuit preparations, challenge and stop the Homeowner Rights stripping law aka S2015. Please contribute to the Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending. MAAPL needed to break this powerful constitutional lawsuit into two pieces. The first, small lawsuit seeks to extend the deadline for homeowners to record to preserve their rights. This piece was successfully filed (see links to coverage at www.MAAPL.info). But Massachusetts Chapter 141 of the Laws of 2015 —S2015 itself— is completely unconstitutional! To challenge it and file that more fundamental suit in the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, MAAPL must now raise the rest of the $7,400 to cover its separate filing fee and pay the lawyer who did the majority of the (fabulous) writing. We’re so close! We’re so excited! When foreclosed homeowners find out they can fight back, it is life-changing! The stories I’ve heard at our outreach clinics have been horrifying: one couple was pressured into a cash for keys deal when their brother had just been found dead in the house while trying to help them pack up! But we’ve also received profound thanks: seen people cry on someone’s shoulder in appreciation and then watched them walk out of the clinics with heads high, empowered to fight back. Affidavits filed at the registry have stopped sales of 3 homes already and one saved their court case which they won! We must challenge S2015 in Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. Will you donate $50 or what you are able to MAAPL now? Go to www.MAAPL.info, look on home page, right hand column for our protected, PayPal donation site for our protected, PayPal donation site. Love, Grace *Special thanks to all of you who have contributed already!!! And special shout out to the Green-Rainbow Party for their additional solicitation! MAAPL – The Massachusetts Alliance Against Predatory Lending A coalition of local and state-wide organizations working together to reverse the foreclosure crisis. MAAPL.INFO
In the days leading up to the February 23, 2017 filing deadline to retain your 20 year right to challenge your foreclosure in court,
MAAPL is scheduling a series of Anti-Foreclosure Legal Clinics in key towns and cities across Massachusetts to help homeowners file their affidavits at their local Registry of Deeds.
What if thousands joined the fight and reversed the tide on the banks? Your getting the word out right now could make this a reality.
Mass Alliance Against Predatory Lending is in a massive push to reach the 77,000 who have been foreclosed (no doubt illegally) in Massachusetts.
1. That most foreclosures have been illegal and people can now fight and win.
2. They have 20 years after the foreclosure happened to rejoin the fight and get justice.
3. They have go to try to get to a clinic or get in touch with MAAPL right now.
The next deadline for protecting their rights is February 23, 2017. www.maapl.info links to the clinics that have been scheduled across the state.
Those fighting foreclosure can also call in any Sunday night,
RIGHT NOW, we need you to be the arms and voices to reach folks who are alone, feeling isolated and ashamed.
Normally notification would be the responsibility of our Attorney General, but she hasn’t done it.
NOW we need you to make it a reality. These are the last of the clinics in Massachusetts!!!
- Monday, Feb. 20th, 4-8pm: New Bedford, MA Anti-Foreclosure Clinic
- Tuesday, Feb. 21st, 6:30-9pm: Franklin County Anti-Foreclosure Clinic
- Wednesday, Feb. 22nd, 1:00-5:00 pm Roxbury, MA Anti-Foreclosure Clinic
Tennessee courts are no longer blindly accepting the “we have the Note, therefore we win” position consistently taken by the “banks” and servicers.
Wells Fargo Bank has been ordered to pay a Dallas woman more than $8 million by a state judge who concluded the bank defrauded her in serving as a trustee for a trust established when she was orphaned at age 7. On June 30, Tobolowsky ruled in favor of Militello’s claims that she had been cheated out of her funds. That amount includes more than $1.5 million in losses, $1 million for mental anguish, and $3.5 million in exemplary — or punitive — damages. The total also includes various amounts for interest, costs and nearly $500,000 in attorneys’ fees.
The CFPB alleged the bank illegally relied on robo-signing — signing mass quantities of documents without verifying the data in those accounts — and provided inaccurate information to third-party debt collectors when it sold the accounts. The bureau also said that Chase filed misleading lawsuits using inaccurate information to obtain debt collection judgments — on accounts that were paid off, discharged in bankruptcy, or otherwise were uncollectable.
This is a serious FCCPA case, in which there were a large number of violations that occurred over a long period of time, and in which the Bank ignored the Goodins' repeated attempts to fix its many errors. The Court, as fact-finder, finds that the Goodins have proven by clear and convincing evidence that a punitive damages award of $100,000 is appropriate. With their home at stake, the Goodins might as well have been talking to a brick wall. In taking no action to prevent the errors from continuing, even after being repeatedly notified of them, the Bank employees' conduct was so wanting in care that it constituted a conscious disregard and indifference to the Goodins' rights. The judge found that BANA violated the FDCPA and awarded 50k/each to husband and wife for compensatory damages, based mainly on emotional distress as proved by the consumers’ testimony of anxiety, frustration, and sleeplessness. Also, he awarded $100,000 in punitives under the FDCPA, even given a very stringent Florida statute, because BANA’s negligence was gross, by a clear and convincing standard, primarily because the debtors tried to fix the discrepancy numerous times, but the bank did not fix it, and initiated foreclosure.
Plaintiffs filed suit against Ocwen after their lender's purchase of their residence at a nonjudicial foreclosure sale, alleging that Ocwen violated Civil Code section 2923.6, the prohibition on "dual tracking" contained in the Homeowners Bill of Rights, when it conducted a foreclosure sale of plaintiffs' property while their loan modification application was pending. The trial court sustained Ocwen’s demurrer. However, the court concluded that by alleging the submission of the loan modification application three days after receipt of the Offer Letter, and the transmittal of the additional documents requested by Ocwen on the date of request, plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged that a complete loan modification application was pending at the time Ocwen foreclosed on their home in violation of section 2923.6. Accordingly, the court reversed the judgment of the trial court.
Ice said the judge's eight-page order against sealing the documents "goes a long way" toward supporting Ice Legal's argument against disqualification. "The court has already ruled this is in the public domain—almost all foreclosure defense attorneys know about this," he said. The judge's ruling should help prevent "robo-testifying" in the future, Ice said. "It was really a win for the public."
Imagine how outrageous it would be if some Wall Street sharpies went to court to argue that they didn’t benefit enough from the bailouts and that taxpayers should pay them tens of billions of dollars more. In fact, they did. And, according to legal observers, they just might prevail.
The State of Texas unjustly enriched itself by allowing a disingenuous legislative enterprise to victimize and deprive deserving homeowners. Texas homeowners were supposed to be "made whole" by the settlement. Instead, they were unmercifully pillaged. Through this scheme the State of Texas benefitted from an enormous profit, yet never suffered injury or harm, and was never foreclosed upon and then evicted. Texas pocketed all the money - the HOMEOWNERS WHO SUFFERED THE INJURIES GOT NOTHING!
"While the bank claims that these were communications with its agent, it has produced nothing to show that coaxing witnesses to commit perjury was part of its agency agreement with Ocwen, Ice wrote in a May 28 response to Sokolof's motion; It's just trying to get even with us for letting the world know what they're doing. You can't protect future fraud on the court by way of attorney-client privilege."
UPDATE: Glaski and the WAMU Trust
I note for the Court's benefit that a transfer to the Trust on June 11, 2009 is a legal impossibility for a number of reasons. I cannot conclude that this particular mortgage loan was ever owned by any of the parties. It is my opinion that this Trust does not own this mortgage loan. (This is why the banks do not want us questioning the trusts.)
Mains lost in the trial court and the appellate court affirmed.
Though defendants’ November 15, 2012, motion seeking vacatur of the summary judgment was not filed within 30 days of that judgment, defendants’ challenge was not untimely. The final judgment in a mortgage foreclosure action is the order confirming the sale and ordering the distribution of proceeds. EMC Mortgage Corp. v. Kemp
Foreclosure Auction Bid-Rigging or Fraud
The mortgage industry in America is saturated in fraud from appraisals to the sale of foreclosed properties, especially properties seized though illegal foreclosure. In some cases, it appears local sheriffs, judges, foreclosure-mills and title companies are willfully participating in and profiting from the illegal activities surrounding these rigged auctions.
(This link takes you to our Daily News page where we have linked to the referenced cases from 2012/2013 demonstrating the complete securitization fail. Anyone who is arguing secuitization, should file these cases with the Court.)
The true ownership of millions of mortgages issued during the housing bubble was fatally corrupted, and now it's impossible to prove who actually legally controls those mortgages.
Foreclosure defense attorney Thomas Ice said he's uncovered a script that was provided to Ocwen witnesses to crush homeowner defenses and allegations of robo-witnesses by financial services sector employees who have no first-hand knowledge of mortgage details.
No Statute of Limitations on VOID Deed
Under our prior case law it is well-settled that a forged deed is void ab initio, meaning a legal nullity at its inception. As such, any encumbrance upon real property based on a forged deed is null and void. Therefore, the statute of limitations set forth in CPLR 213 (8) does not foreclose plaintiff's claim against defendant. As the Appellate Division affirmed the dismissal of plaintiff's claims as time-barred, we now reverse.
REFERENCED: ["(o)f course, there is no statute of limitations in respect to the challenge of a forged deed, which is void ab initio"]; The high court of West Virginia, for example, has observed that "there is no statute of limitations regarding void deeds"; "while the high court of Idaho held that " [b]ecause [a] lease agreement was void ab initio, it could be challenged at any time"
Attorney Beth Findsen uses Deutsche Bank as a speed-bag.
(Denying DB's Motion to Vacate Judgment)
One of the disturbing aspects of this case is McLeod won and quieted the title in 2008. Deutsche Bank refuses to accept the fact that they lost this case against a pro se homeowner. Deutsche Bank is running out of courtrooms and attorneys, as it has repeatedly lost in Federal Court, State Court, and lost all of its appeals. This year, Deutsche claimed the 2008 judgment is void or “cannot possibly affect any rights of Defendant”. Today, the court denied Deutsche again, and is now awarding attorney fees to McLeod's new counsel, Beth Findsen.
All 700 employees let go.
Law firm of Butler and Hosch, P.A closes its doors overnight with a memo to employees on 5/14. Their website says that the firm provides “cradle to grave” service in all aspects of real estate and mortgage serving law (eviction, foreclosures, litigation, loss mitigation, REO, Title) since 1972 all under one roof.
Award and recognition: LPS Attorney Performance “Best in State” award for foreclosure and bankruptcy.
Additional information sent to MSFraud: A quote from an employee on Glass door: Pros “None to speak of at this point…Can list a whole laundry list of cons, nothing more to say… the company had gone under Cons “Everything about [firm] is a con…. (posted 5/14) Posted 5/13 Pros There is a lot of dating within the company pool; Cons “Disfunction junction. Ethics not a thing at [firm] “The problems with management are exacerbated by the problems with the off shore employees. Manilla employees speak almost zero English. Just enough to merge a pleading and fill in some blanks. There is no quality control and only one native English speaker in the entire Manilla office. And then management is “shocked” when client systems are updated incorrectly or pleadings are filled with blatant errors.”
Callan has satisfied her burden to demonstrate that an actual controversy exists between the parties and that she is entitled to a declaration that more than four years have expired since Deutsche’s cause of action accrued and its lien on the Property has expired. Her claim for declaratory judgment is granted. Deutsche’s lien on the property is void. Callan’s claim for relief to quiet title is granted.
DAVID J. STERN
Florida law provides that a judgment can be opened or vacated if it was obtained by fraud, or if it is void, and also has a “crime/fraud” exception to the attorney/client privilege which does not protect communications between a party and its attorney if those communications were made in furtherance of the perpetration of or for the purpose of committing a crime or fraud even if the crime or fraud is not consummated.
over its collection practices
The suit could have broad and long-lasting implications for all homeowners, whether their loans are serviced by Green Tree or not.
- MERS helped precipitate the foreclosure crisis and left homeowners without recourse to protect their property rights.
- MERS increased the costs of enforcing property rights and left homeowners without recourse to challenge wrongful foreclosures.
- Court proceedings and federal agency investigations have further exposed the inaccuracy of records in the MERS database.
Now read the MASS. AG's "FIX" to help consummate the banks' crimes, sanitize MERS' damage, and cover-up title fraud...
"If the bank performed a void foreclosure on your property, it will provide assistance to you to remedy the void foreclosure and clear the title to the property." - even though that bank never owned the property and has no legal authority to clear the title!
An Old Remedy Has New Teeth
That cheaters should not be allowed to prosper has long been central to the moral fabric of our society and one of the underpinnings of our legal system.
Dismissal with prejudice has long been available as the ultimate civil sanction against litigation misconduct, but is often bypassed
and why it cannot be a beneficiary under a deed of trust.
The rampant abuse of the MERS nominee status and purported beneficiary status by document preparation services in concert with loan servicers, allegations calling into question the authority of MERS to assign a deed of trust, are always plausibly stated.
The defendant waived the defense of lack of standing.
(This reversal does not validate the VOID assignment.)
The earlier decision in
their Foreclosure Specialist didn't know anything about anything.
Lend America did not deliver the subject note to MERS. The subject mortgage did not give MERS the authority to assign the subject note.
In September 2010, Residential Credit Solutions began rejecting Hammer's monthly payments and refused to acknowledge the existence of the loan modification. RCS then proceeded to prosecute two separate foreclosure actions against Hammer, despite the fact that Hammer, still to this day, has tendered all of her monthly payments as required under the loan modification agreement. The first foreclosure case was dismissed in favor of Hammer and against RCS in 2011.
government says in suit.
The U.S. government alleges Quicken Loans knowingly violated mortgage underwriting practices just to close bad loans insured by FHA -- a practice it says has cost taxpayers millions of dollars and hurt neighborhoods when the houses went into foreclosure.
This is impressive, well-written, and confirms what homeowners have been screaming about for two decades. The key word here is "wrongful" foreclosure, and the AG uses it repeatedly.
name-calling, inflated payments, lies
The Federal Trade Commission and Consumer Financial Protection Bureau allege Green Tree has spent the years since the financial crisis terrorizing homeowners.
Green Tree abused homeowners who are behind on their mortgages by swearing at them, calling them names, mocking their illnesses and threatening them with prison will pay out more than $60 million.
Moved to Seize Widow’s Home.
But didn’t tell her the loan was insured.
When her husband passed away in 2003, Select Portfolio and Bank of America did not arrange a payoff of the $100,000 policy and continued to charge his widow an insurance premium every month along with her mortgage payment.
How many don't know their home was insured?
Bank Of America Threatens Foreclosure
The Shepherds fear if they lose their house, they won't be able to afford a place that can accommodate all of the girls medical equipment and special set-up.
$6 Million Award Upheld by Montana Supreme Court!
The jury found that the Bank defrauded McCulley and awarded her $1,000,000 in compensatory damages and $5,000,000 in punitive damages, which the District Court approved. The Supreme Court affirmed the damages judgment, and reversed the calculation of interest on the judgment.
PRECEDENTIAL DEBT COLLECTION CASE
The body of the Foreclosure Complaint listed certain not-yet-incurred fees as due and owing, which Kaymark alleges violated several state and federal fair debt collection laws and breached the mortgage contract. Because we conclude that Kaymark has sufficiently pled that the disputed fees constituted actionable misrepresentation under the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., we will reverse the District Court’s order dismissing certain FDCPA claims against Udren Law Offices.
This is a crime scene. GET HER HOUSE BACK!
EMC MORTGAGE SWINDLE
"I wish I had died of cancer, it would have been easier," said Hartman.
Through no fault of her own, the mortgage went into foreclosure and now she has just days to find a new place to live. The trouble started 10 years ago when her mortgage was sold from one company to another.
Since at least 1992, EMC Mortgage has stolen countless homes by simply refusing homeowner's full and timely payments. And the Department of Justice won't prosecute?
"It truly concerns me, however, that thousands and thousands -- thousands and thousands of mortgage foreclosure actions have been filed with these allegations. I am not certain what remedy, if any, these people would have were it to be determined that MERS was not ever the proper party notwithstanding that these folks [might] have been in default what their recourse, if any, would be. I'm not certain with the satisfaction of mortgages that have been filed on behalf of MERS how good those are and I am not certain how good title to property is that people bought at these foreclosure sales if it turns or becomes established that MERS was indeed not only not the right party but misrepresented by way of their pleadings and affidavits that they held something they didn't own, so I'm not certain of the consequences but it seems vast."
- The Honorable Judge Jon Gordon - September 2005 (Emphasis added)