Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Michigan Supremes: $3.75Billion of Chase / WAMU mortgages VOIDABLE
Michigan Supremem Court Syllabus ^ | 12/21/2012 | Robert P. Young Jr.

Posted on 01/02/2013 2:01:13 PM PST by Neidermeyer

KIM v JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, NA .....

The Court of Appeals, DONOFRIO, P.J., and STEPHENS and RONAYNE KRAUSE, JJ., reversed, concluding that because defendant was not the original mortgagee and had acquired the loan by assignment rather than by operation of law, defendant was obligated under MCL 600.3204(3) to record the assignment of plaintiffs’ mortgage to it before foreclosing by advertisement. The Court of Appeals determined that defendant’s failure to record the assignment rendered the sheriff’s sale void ab initio. 295 Mich App 200 (2012). The Supreme Court granted defendant’s application for leave to appeal. 491 Mich 915 (2012). In an opinion by Justice MARILYN KELLY, joined by Justices CAVANAGH,MARKMAN, and HATHAWAY, the Supreme Court held: When a subsequent mortgagee acquires an interest in a mortgage through a voluntary purchase agreement with the FDIC, the mortgage has not been acquired by operation of law and that subsequent mortgagee must comply with the provisions of MCL 600.3204 and record the assignment of the mortgage before foreclosing on the mortgage by advertisement. Any defect or irregularity in a foreclosure proceeding results in a foreclosure that is voidable, not void ab initio.

(Excerpt) Read more at courts.michigan.gov ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; Government; US: Michigan
KEYWORDS: chasebank; foreclosure; fraudclosure; michigan; mortgage; obamarecession; theft; wamu
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last
If you don't own it you can't foreclose.... If ANYONE here was foreclosed on in Michigan and had a WAMU note please contact them .. you must contest the foreclosure but YOU WILL GET YOUR HOME BACK ...
1 posted on 01/02/2013 2:01:24 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

READ


2 posted on 01/02/2013 2:03:55 PM PST by Rumplemeyer (The GOP should stand its ground - and fix Bayonets)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

The bank should stop making mortgage loans. Every bank in Michigan should.


3 posted on 01/02/2013 2:06:21 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Springman; cyclotic; netmilsmom; RatsDawg; PGalt; FreedomHammer; queenkathy; madison10; ...
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

Weekly/biweekly Michigan legislative action thread
4 posted on 01/02/2013 2:08:27 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

Ah, so who are the FReeper chumps who are actually paying your mortgage?


5 posted on 01/02/2013 2:09:13 PM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

May more of this collateral fraud be exposed.


6 posted on 01/02/2013 2:10:21 PM PST by Varsity Flight (Extortion-Care is the Government Work-Camp: Arbeitsziehungslager)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
Except for the annual tribute to the local shakedown mobsters, I've got this modest trainwreck (with grand piano in the parlor) free and clear.

/johnny

7 posted on 01/02/2013 2:10:35 PM PST by JRandomFreeper (Gone Galt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

they got what they deserved.

The bought a loan and then tried to avoid the document tax stamps throught the fiction of a “servicing agent” who did not own but did own the note.

It was sold on the “foclosure value” of the appraisal which the bank knew was an inflated fiction.


8 posted on 01/02/2013 2:10:44 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

The edit to the headline, indicating that (some) transferred MORTGAGES are voidable, is not borne out by the body text.

Rather, the court seems to have ruled that FORECLOSURES are voidable where the new holder of a mortgage debt has failed, prior to foreclosing, to comply with “MCL 600.3204(3) [by] record[ing] the assignment ... before foreclosing by advertisement.”

But i don’t see anything indicating that any such foreclosure, once voided as having been begun without that recordation, cannot be re-begun AFTER that paperwork is filled out ... ?

Shorter version: There’s a big difference between forcing the note-holder to start the foreclosure all over and avoiding the entire underlying debt.


9 posted on 01/02/2013 2:12:00 PM PST by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

those who took out mortgages still owe what they borrowed


10 posted on 01/02/2013 2:14:04 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

One of the goals of the Marxists is to invalidate contract law. Credit will then become unavailable.


11 posted on 01/02/2013 2:16:15 PM PST by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; abb
those who took out mortgages still owe what they borrowed

This bears repeating:

Those Who Took Out Mortgages Still Owe What They Borrowed

Unless those foreclosed upon can prove that they were in compliance with the major terms of the mortgage...including all the repayments terms...they should not get the houses back or any other form of compensation.

12 posted on 01/02/2013 2:33:30 PM PST by Gay State Conservative (When Robbing Peter To Pay Paul,One Can Always Count On Paul's Cooperation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
The bank should stop making mortgage loans. Every bank in Michigan should.

Wouldn't that play right into the government's hands. The government could then issue their own mortgages and in effect own the properties. We could eventually be reduced to landless serfs working for the lords and ladies of the ruling class.

13 posted on 01/02/2013 2:33:54 PM PST by oldbrowser (They are marxists, don't call them democrats)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: abb

BS. If the lender does not have the NOTE to prove ownership then they have no interest. Someone is holding the note and they can come forward for payment. How would you like to payoff your house and the bank say they don’t hold the original note for cancellation.


14 posted on 01/02/2013 2:40:09 PM PST by Orange1998 (DO NOT PRESS CTRL W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: oldbrowser

isn’t that where this ruling is headed anyways?

what is the difference between government doing it and a court forcing it to be done?


15 posted on 01/02/2013 2:49:25 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Orange1998

The banks made a hell of a mess by buying and selling debts.

I figured the game out when I paid my last payment only to be hit with foreclosure threats from 2 different servicing agencies within a month. The saving grace for me was having everything in order after threatening Wells Fargo with a lawsuit after a tree fell on my house and finding that I wasn’t insured despite my premium being included in my payment. (They got caught pocketing the money)


16 posted on 01/02/2013 2:53:43 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

those who took out mortgages still owe what they borrowed

Of course, assuming the real owner can be determined. These lenders thought they were above the law. A very small percentage are being held to it. The lender rights the contract, if they don’t like the results, it’s their own fault. Now if only actual people who committed fraud in the robo signing scandal would actually do real time.


17 posted on 01/02/2013 2:57:17 PM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer; All

Interesting post & thread.


18 posted on 01/02/2013 2:59:03 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Orange1998

Assuming you have kept records of payments that prove you are up to date, and have the original paperwork when you took out your mortgage, you should be proof against any judgement.

Now if you didn’t uphold your end of the deal, and missed some payments, you could be in trouble.


19 posted on 01/02/2013 3:01:59 PM PST by abb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
Only the beginning...CDO/sub-prime fraud(particularly post 9/11)may yet bring down the House_of_Cards

There are so many shoes yet to drop from the gluttony/thievery going back to the 90's...much is being held back from the public(mostly because of the current occupant of the White House)by a compliant media along with a business(fraud)partner treasury/Federal Reserve, not to mention a reprehensible executive, legislative, judicial governing class.

"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste. And what I mean by that is an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before"...Rahm Emanuel

Someone else said it best..."our Founders would have been shooting by now"...at the very least there should have been(should still be)a whole'lot of folks going to jail.

20 posted on 01/02/2013 3:12:01 PM PST by RckyRaCoCo ( Shall Not Be Infringed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
What total horse-crap!

If you know that you have not been paying your mortgage, at the monthly contractural price that you signed for, who cares who owns the paper. You know that you haven't paid your debt, and the holder of the paper can assert the rights that you originally agreed to.

The language that you signed up for is to promise to pay XYZ, “or their assigns, or successors”.

21 posted on 01/02/2013 3:32:21 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

We had WAMU at some point. How do I find out more?


22 posted on 01/02/2013 4:01:31 PM PST by Jabba the Nutt (.Are they stupid, malicious or evil?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
Michigan Supremes: $3.75Billion of Chase / WAMU mortgages VOIDABLE

Wishful thinking on someone's part leads to a misleading headline.

Someone should apply for a job with CBS.

(Hint. It is the foreclosure, not the mortgage, that is voidable.) Should be fairly easy to cure - just record an assignment prior to completing the re-foreclosure. Of course, someone's hand is going to get very tired.

23 posted on 01/02/2013 5:08:11 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: abb

One of the goals of the Marxists is to invalidate contract law. Credit will then become unavailable.

so obvious
i wish i thought of this


24 posted on 01/02/2013 10:34:31 PM PST by genghis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

just record an assignment prior to completing the re-foreclosure.
**********************************************
NEGATIVE , This is not “wishful thinking” , WAMU , a defunct org cannot execute an assignment of any kind and NEITHER CAN CHASE as Chase never bought the notes they have no standing to execute an assignment or foreclose ..

You’re not seeing the big picture here.


25 posted on 01/03/2013 3:26:25 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

the holder of the paper can assert the rights that you originally agreed to.
***************************
NEGATIVE , MUST BE Holder and Owner ,,, just holding doesn’t give standing.. especially when it is public record that the “holder” paid nothing for the notes .. no consideration=not a valid sale ,, no standing ..

TRY AGAIN with a valid argument.


26 posted on 01/03/2013 3:29:09 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

Those justices should be hung!!!

Pay your mortgage or get the hell out of the house!!!


27 posted on 01/03/2013 3:31:11 AM PST by dalereed
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: genghis

One of the goals of the Marxists is to invalidate contract law. Credit will then become unavailable.
*******************************************
AGREED , the BANKS have been working to invalidate contract law for about 20 years ,, time we started enforcing the law .. FRiend. This is how we get sanity back into the USA.


28 posted on 01/03/2013 3:31:11 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Ah, so who are the FReeper chumps who are actually paying your mortgage?
************************************
My mortgage was “paid in Full” years ago... This is a “rule of law” thread ,, and the banks which have been abusing the law for years finally took a body blow ... this is the beginning of a series of rulings that means they will have to actually start FOLLOWING THE LAW.


29 posted on 01/03/2013 3:34:02 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

those who took out mortgages still owe what they borrowed
***********************************************
YES , but to whom? There is no record of any sale or transfer ,, some mortgages have been traced to having been sold over 600 times (not a typo).


30 posted on 01/03/2013 3:36:17 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Gay State Conservative

Unless those foreclosed upon can prove that they were in compliance with the major terms of the mortgage...including all the repayments terms...they should not get the houses back or any other form of compensation.
*********************************************
That is putting things upside down , it’s not up to the borrower to prove innocence , the foreclosing party should show where the monies went ,, funny ,, none of them can ever come up with simple documents that were previously (prior to about 1995) ALWAYS included in the evidence presented when a bank filed for foreclosure , NONE OF THEM CAN.


31 posted on 01/03/2013 3:39:14 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: dalereed

This ruling states that contract is binding upon both parties. Do you disagree?

How would you like for a party with whom you’ve never contracted to try to force you out of your house via judicial foreclosure process?

It’s happened in at least one instance to people in a paid off house.

That said, nonpayment of the note has clearly defined consequences, terms of which are spelled out in the contract.

The party with legal right to enforce terms can and should foreclose. Parties without such legal right cannot and are committing fraud. Prosecute the fraud just as surely as foreclosure is pursued.


32 posted on 01/03/2013 3:46:57 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

who cares who owns the paper.
************************************
OK THEN , I will file foreclosure on you with faked documents stating I own the note and you haven’t paid me.. the courts will accept everything I say as fact and you will be in the street in 30 days.. sounds fair to me.

What can you contest ,, ownership transfer of the notes aren’t documented , you certainly can’t show cancelled checks made out to me ..

Assuming you pay off your mortgage ... how many people are receiving a RECORDED SATISFACTION stating that it’s paid off? NOBODY !! because the banks CAN’T ISSUE ONE , They no longer own SQUAT. I know of people that have paid off mortgages who were foreclosed upon by other 3rd parties who claimed to own the note. HAPPENS DAILY with the mess the banks created with their FRAUD.


33 posted on 01/03/2013 3:46:58 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Jabba the Nutt

We had WAMU at some point. How do I find out more?
**********************************************
This will be discussed more ,, has been a point of discusson for at least 5 years but on FR it is always the “think they knows” fighting for MORE AND BIGGER BANK FRAUD as if that’s a good thing and not what sank our economy.

Three good sites for information are:

http://4closurefraud.org/

http://mattweidnerlaw.com/blog/

http://livinglies.wordpress.com/


34 posted on 01/03/2013 3:53:13 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

The language that you signed up for is to promise to pay XYZ, “or their assigns, or successors”.
*********************************************
YES and the notes were sold (read as “Paid in Full”) to Wall Street who then consolidated the income streams to make a security (the mortgages no longer exist at this point).

When no “ASSIGNS or SUCCESSORS” are able to be proven as the note was paid/destroyed and no assignments , assumptions or sales EVER took place and are not documented and nobody can show with a simple receipt that a sale took place ... To whom do you make your payments? Whoever it is CAN NEVER GIVE YOU A “SATISFACTION” in return when you make that last payment ...


35 posted on 01/03/2013 4:00:57 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: abb

Just because you paid “someone” is not proof of paying. If the note holder did not credit payment you will be foreclosed. Not a judge to help you. The “note” is a bearer instrument well defined in law. Showing cancelled checks to wrong party is no defense.


36 posted on 01/03/2013 10:01:29 AM PST by Orange1998 (DO NOT PRESS CTRL W)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
finding that I wasn’t insured despite my premium being included in my payment. (They got caught pocketing the money)

This happens a lot more than people think. Chase tried to pull this on us just once--fortunately, my sis is my insurance agent and notified me immediately that my annual hadn't been paid. Now, when I receive a copy of my insurance premium notice every January, I set up a three-way phone call between Chase,, Farm Bureau, and myself. None of us hang up until the payment has been electronically sent and received. Takes about 20 minutes. Each year Chase tells me it's not necessary to do this, and each year I tell Chase that I don't trust them at all. Can't wait to have the damn mortgage paid off!

37 posted on 01/03/2013 1:44:44 PM PST by grellis (I am Jill's overwhelming sense of disgust.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: grellis

My attorney showed Wells Fargo that he could prove that I had been paying the insurance as part of my mortgage payment and that the insurance company could show that they had no record of Wells Fargo paying them.

Wells Fargo apparently figured it would be cheaper to cut a check than fight me in court while getting some bad PR and sent a claims adjuster out to cut me a check for $20 grand, 10 of it I used for repairs and the other 10 paid off the remainder of my mortgage.


38 posted on 01/03/2013 2:30:30 PM PST by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

fraud in the factum.

If the transaction was born in fraud it is void not just voidable.

the apraisal was knowingly manipulated in order to induce fraud in the application process.

If the house was valued properly, would consideration to the promissory note resale profit, then the price would have been lower.

Remember the product was NOT the real estate, the product was the paper. The land and buyer were mere collateral damage.


39 posted on 01/03/2013 2:56:37 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

but the transfers were never recorded as required by law. the note and mortage are two seperate documents. The motgage is just what ties the note to the land.

if banks actually followed the recording law the amound of doc stamp revenue would be enormous.


40 posted on 01/03/2013 3:04:37 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

Don’t let your desire for Obama ‘free stuff’ cloud your thinking ability.

Yes, WAMU can’t execute an assignment.

Yes, Chase can’t execute an assignment.

BUT, the Receiver CAN execute an assignment. Read the part again about the FDIC taking the loan by operation of law.

As to whether Chase bought this loan from the FDIC, I haven’t read the agreement between the FDIC and Chase, and I suspect that you haven’t, either.


41 posted on 01/03/2013 6:14:26 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

Read the part again about the FDIC taking the loan by operation of law.
*************************************
BOGUS! , the verbiage “by operation of law” is one of those nebulous terms used when there is no clear argument ... these “loans” no longer existed the minute they were used to create the certificates/securities , therefore they cannot be receivables and there can be no transfer no matter how much you want it to happen ... read up on UCC3 and UCC9 .


42 posted on 01/03/2013 8:15:09 PM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

...................To whom do you make your payments? Whoever it is CAN NEVER GIVE YOU A “SATISFACTION” in return when you make that last payment ..............

Maybe I’m a simpleton! But, if you can show cancelled checks, or drafts, that you have paid your mortgage debt to a holder of record on time and in the proper amounts, you countersue the current foreclosure agent showing him that you are paid up to date, and then let the note parties work it out amongst themselves.

I believe that everyone that has been foreclosed upon during the past decade fiasco knows that they have either paid their obligation, or have not paid. No pay, no excuses!

WAMU declared me in default, and was going to foreclose, and a few nasty letters between the CEO’s office and myself, along with copies of my cancelled checks finally cleared up their problem after four months of go around.
Then, the next month they made another posting error, and they started off the bullshit once again.


43 posted on 01/03/2013 8:40:21 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PAR35

Read the part again about the FDIC taking the loan by operation of law.
*****************************************
From a lawyer well versed in this case ..

Chase clearly has a problem, as set forth in the recent Michigan Supreme Court decision. There is no “operation of law” by which the loan could have been transferred. The purchase and assumption agreement do not transfer the loans —- especially and obviously the loans that WAMU had already sold. The FDIC receiver has stated that no document exists assigning the loans. And no document exists that gives Chase the right to service the loans, but that would probably not be a strong point. If they assert agency for servicing and everyone accepted the assertion by conduct, it would be hard to achieve anything attacking their status as a servicer. But that doesn’t mean they are a creditor.

Without an assignment, the loan, even if the loan documents are valid (highly questionable), would still be in the estate of WAMU, which technically doesn’t exist unless something is reopened — the receivership, the bankruptcy etc. What is required here is clarity on who the principal is since Chase cannot claim subrogation without showing proof of payment, which they don’t have.

(more) http://livinglies.wordpress.com/2013/01/04/chase-reliance-on-bogus-affidavit-and-operation-of-law/


44 posted on 01/04/2013 10:15:44 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Noob1999

Then, the next month they made another posting error, and they started off the bullshit once again.
******************************************
These errors occur because the supposed lender is usually only acting as a servicer and has no real idea what is expected as far as payment on each loan by the Master Servicer who is usually the Wall Street “bank” that created the security that they sold shares in. WAMU sold everything into securitization .. Noob1999 you don’t have a loan with WAMU (or Chase) , it was destroyed as an operation of creating the certificates sold. You are still being used as a cash cow despite the fact that your obligation was extinguished. You will NEVER NEVER NEVER get clear title on that property. Why are you making RENT payments on it ?


45 posted on 01/04/2013 10:23:14 AM PST by Neidermeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

.............You will NEVER NEVER NEVER get clear title on that property. Why are you making RENT payments on it ..........

I got clear title the next month after the beginning re-foreclosure fiasco, when I refinanced with another bank - and WAMU filed the required UC3 releasing all leins, along with an apology from the CEO of WAMU for his organizations mishandling of my jumbo mortgage.


46 posted on 01/04/2013 12:52:26 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

.............You will NEVER NEVER NEVER get clear title on that property. Why are you making RENT payments on it ..........

I got clear title the next month after the beginning re-foreclosure fiasco, when I refinanced with another bank - and WAMU filed the required UCC3 releasing all leins, along with an apology from the CEO of WAMU for his organizations mishandling of my jumbo mortgage.


47 posted on 01/04/2013 12:53:00 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
would still be in the estate of WAMU, which technically doesn’t exist unless something is reopened — the receivership

Your 'expert' probably needs to check again if he thinks the WAMU receivership has been terminated.

I'd be surprised if the loans were in the holding company rather than the savings and loan, but given how that place was being run, anything is possible. As for whether they were sold; that should be easy. Just look for an assignment out of WAMU or the receiver.

48 posted on 01/04/2013 4:35:26 PM PST by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer

Neidermeyer,

Surely you have some sort of a vested interest in these inter-banking transactions, or, have a serious distrust of the banking industry.

I’m a simpleton! If a mortgage holder can submit proof that
they made payment to a lender of record, any lender of record, of their mortgage; on a timely basis and in the correct monthly amount, there is absolutely no reason why that borrower should go into foreclosure proceedings.

Let the paper-holders fight it out amongst themselves. All this bull-shit of accessing fines to all these banks for improper paperwork clearing, leading to client foreclosures,
is just that, bull-shit.

A borrower knows whether he made mortgage payments or not. The rest of the banking clearance procedures is all intercompany bullshit!!

Every banking transaction spells out the full disclosure as to who owns the receivables and the payables. If there’s a problem, and the borrower has the loan documentation, let the big boys duke it out!

But, if the borrower hasn’t paid, then its a question who can foreclose, not if they can foreclose. To the borrower it makes no difference if they have not kept current with signed documents. They know they are in arrears!


49 posted on 01/04/2013 9:13:54 PM PST by Noob1999 (Loose Lips, Sink Ships)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Neidermeyer
bookmark

.

50 posted on 01/04/2013 9:54:00 PM PST by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-58 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson