Notice to Potential Bidders:
You will be bidding on a
lien, not on a property
up is this $400,000 lien, um, I mean property, that was stolen
by a bank. As with all our items for sale, this Note was
intentionally destroyed years ago, so the Deed/lien has
nothing to attach to. All the assignments of mortgage have
been forged and fabricated by the mortgage industry, rendering
the title fatally-flawed and unmarketable. But the industry
has secret oral
with most of our local judges demanding they give value to
your worthless purchase, and have streamlined the litigation
process to conclude within 5-20 years.
we have a bid for $400,000 from the fool in the back - do I
hear $425? ...”
George Mantor | 11/21/14
The Notice to Potential
Bidders is now included in all Notice of Trustee Sale recordings in
California. I’ll bet most foreclosure buyers
still think they are bidding on actual property. They aren’t; they
are bidding on a debt that the current owner can’t collect on.
When a big
powerful collection agency gives up on a debt, they auction it off on
the Courthouse steps just as though real property were involved.
It is well
known, yet never discussed, that the mortgage-backed securities are
backed by nothing at all. The same mortgages were used over and over
again. The investors are mostly pension funds which, as a result, are
substantially underfunded. The only people who don’t know about this
are the pensioners themselves.
satisfied with that, many lenders are further engaged in the process
of stealing people’s homes. As everyone now knows, fraudclosure
victims got little of the tens of billions of dollars from all of
those fraudclosure settlements. The agreements themselves were gifts
to the big banks and servicers, allowing them to take billions on tax
credits for reducing mortgage balances on mortgages they didn’t even
I got no
money in my settlement agreement with a party I did not sue. Did you
get that? An unnamed party to my law suit settled on behalf of several
other defendants. But, the new entity sent me a 1099 for nearly half a
million dollars. That 1099, along with other provisions of the
government settlements, net $1.3 million off of the settlements total
obligation without this party ever paying out a dime.
The joke is,
I know, that these people have no right to any money I am paying them,
and they totally lack the legal ability to foreclose. I’m just
waiting for the legal landscape to catch up to what we know.
terms of the government settlements, was the agreement to stop
fraudclosing on homes they couldn’t prove their claim to. Pretty
much all of them. This in part has led to the term “zombie
foreclosure” because the majority of securitized loans have
irreparable breaks in the chain of ownership since they were used as
collateral in many different pools of made up loans.
Up until the
settlements, Fidelity Title subsidiary, Lender Processing Services
(LPS), unit DOCX would simply fabricate and forge documents for a fee.
Servicers would robosign
and falsely notarize them. Then the foreclosure mill law firm, posing
as a substituted Trustee by virtue of the paperwork in hand only,
recorded them to get a stamp of authenticity.
and major servicers agreed to stop doing it, although most continue
simply because there is no deterrent to doing so, or they have created
shell companies who do it for them.
America wound up with a warehouse full of old Countrywide predatory
loan files that they could no longer pursue; but that wouldn’t apply
to an entity not a signatory to the settlement agreement. So, those
boxes of files were sold off to new
servicers, many of whom weren’t even in the game until the
settlements were agreed to.
companies (Nationstar, Greenpoint, etc.)
were formed, often by former senior executives of now defunct mortgage
originators, with the express purpose of coercing as many revenue
streams as possible out of boxes of trash, essentially loan
origination files, not custodial files.
There are no
custodial files and many of the loan origination files were destroyed
when street level originators went out of business.
entities send letters saying they are the new servicer and they are
ready to modify the loan. Why not? If ten people out of 100 agree to
send them $2,000 per month on the “Modified” loan, that’s a
great business model. They know that there are no legal parties who
could lawfully foreclose, and because 96 percent of foreclosures are
uncontested, there is almost no obstacle to them threatening or
attempting to foreclose.
actually a new loan that winds up waiving many of the borrower’s
rights going forward. Foreclosing isn’t the primary purpose of these
entities, blackmail is. “Start paying me or I will steal your home
because I can manufacture the documents needed to do it.”
has changed. Despite the billions in settlements and the promise to
never do it again, nothing has changed. They are thumbing their noses
at the justice system because they know that there will be no
consequences. It’s a low risk business plan that converts worthless
documents into either revenue streams or valuable real property while
everyone looks in the other direction.
servicer doesn’t really know who the Trustee is, then who are they
sending the payments to? They aren’t sending anything to anyone.
It’s all a scam.
illustrate, here is an excerpt from a letter I wrote on behalf of a
fraudclosure victim to the Vice President of Bank of New York Mellon,
Mr. Gavin Tsang, and supposed Trustee for many, many pools of tranched-up
of the current status of your loan, you should challenge the Trustee.
You may have no obligation to continue making your payments. Feel free
to use this with appropriate changes.
Dear Mr. Tsang:
Please find enclosed a copy of an Assignment of Deed of Trust purporting
to transfer the alleged note to my property to Bank of New York Mellon
as Successor Trustee to JP Morgan Chase as Trustee for The Holders of
SAMI II Trust 2005-AR8 for value received, by MERS, an entity claiming
to be the holder of the Deed of Trust.
I am certain that you will immediately note that there are numerous
irregularities that conclusively prove that the Assignment is
fabricated, forged, robosigned, falsely notarized, and unlawfully
recorded in violation of California Law.
Nonetheless, these fabricated documents are being used to coerce me into
taking out a loan with an entity named Nationstar Mortgage.
For months, in numerous correspondences, Nationstar insisted that JP
Morgan Chase was the beneficiary of the note referenced in the
Assignment and that Chase had retained them to commence foreclosure
upon the property referenced in the assignment of Deed of Trust.
They advised me to address any questions to Chase.
On July 21, 2014, JP Morgan Chase wrote, “In response to your inquiry,
we have determined that CTX Mortgage is servicing your loan. We have
no record of any mortgage loans for you.”
Upon providing Nationstar Mortgage with the written statement from
Chase, they now insist that you are the one who initiated the
foreclosure. They imply, but do not come right out and say, that you
sent them the Note so that they could proceed.
But, there is no evidence that MERS, you, or anyone other than CTX ever
possessed the note.
Consider the facts.
Fact: The SAMI II trust is a REMIC trust formed in 2006 under the laws
of New York State and governed by a Pooling and Servicing Agreement.
Fact: The Pooling and Servicing Agreement clearly requires the original Mortgage Note with all applicable riders, bearing all
intervening endorsements showing a complete chain of endorsement from
the originator to the last endorsee, endorsed "Pay to the order of _____________, without recourse"
and signed in the name of the last endorsee forwarded to the Trustee
within 90 days of the closing of the trust.
we believe the forged Assignment, that requirement of the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement was not met.
The assignment of Deed of Trust, transferring the Note with it for
valuable consideration was, according to the four corners of the
document, executed on September 27, 2011, by Alice Rowe.
Fact: As Trustee for the Holders of SAMI II Trust 2005-AR8, Mortgage
Pass Through Certificates, you
could not have, nor would you have, accepted that late transfer
because applicable law governing the agreement, EPTL 7-2.4,
specifically prohibits such transfers as ultra vires acts that are
void ab intio.
If you received and accepted the Note in 2011, you would have tax
filing requirements and would have needed to disclose this transfer on
the Trust’s Federal REMIC annual tax return, Form 1066, Schedule J,
Part III, which shows the Trust’s taxable mortgage loan
contributions after the startup or closing date for each taxable year.
That would have cost investors substantial tax penalties.
Fact: The so called endorsements of the Note are also forged and are
ineffective in that they are not on the original Note but what appears
to be a separate sheet of paper with three rubber stamps.
Fact: The undated endorsement of the Note, if that is the Note, by CTX
employee, Danita Ford, is a forgery since Danita Ford left CTX
Mortgage more than five years before the loan was even originated.
This fact alone unavoidably creates the impression of willful deceit
since you or your agents are the party proffering this dubious
document as a tenuous link to collect an alleged debt.
these circumstances create several questions as to whether or not I am
attempting to modify my loan with an entity that has any legal
authority to actually do so and they are fabricating documents to hold
over me the threat of foreclosure if I do not agree to a new loan with
was the Note from the closing of the loan until you received it from
Alice Rowe sometime in late September or early November of 2011? It
had to be somewhere other than the Trust. MERS didn’t have it, they
are nothing but a member accessed data-base with no custodial
California has no requirement that the Assignment of the Deed of Trust
be recorded so why would Nationstar record it?
Because, according to the chain of title, excluding the fabricated 2011
void assignment, Bank of New York has no link to the transaction and
CTX remains the beneficiary under the Deed of Trust and the only party
with whom I could negotiate a modification.
CTX is the last known party to actually have possession of the Note and
Either the loan was placed in the trust or it wasn’t. The production
of Form 1066 establishes the truth, one way or the other.
you are not participating in this obvious fraud, you are involved by
implication. They have no legal authority and are using you to
facilitate interstate criminal activity. If you have the note, it
should be reconveyed to me since, as you know, it has already been
advise Nationstar and their accomplices, Sage Point, to withdraw and
cause to be rescinded all forged documents creating a cloud on my
And for those of you considering
bidding on a foreclosed property, take note of the title of the
article and the title to the property….very closely. The scams