Brooklyn Beatdown – Onewest Bank, F.S.B. v Drayton – Judge Arthur Schack Decision Casts Light on Robo-Signers and Foreclosure Fraud

Posted by: 4closureFraud Post date: 10/27/2010 – 20:15 “The Court requires an affidavit from Erica A. Johnson-Seck, a conflicted “robosigner,” explaining her employment status. A “robo-signer” is a person who quickly signs hundreds or thousands of foreclosure documents in a month, despite swearing that he or she has personally reviewed the mortgage documents and has not done so.” PETRARCH VERSUS ARISTOTLE Posted by: geopol Post date: 10/27/2010 – 17:20 The Venetian method of statecraft isbased on Aristotle – the deepest Aristotelian tradition in theWest. Long before the era of Albertus Magnus (1193-1280) and St.Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274), Venice had established itself as thechief center for the translation and teaching of Aristotle’s works.

 

Navigation PollsDonate To Zero HedgeRecent posts Shopping cart View your shopping cart. User login Username: * Password: * Create new accountRequest new password Zero Hedge Reads Angry BearBearish NewsBoom Bust BlogChina Financial MarketsChris Martenson’s BlogContrary InvestorCoyote BlogCredit WritedownsDaily CapitalistDaneric’s Elliott WavesDealBookDealbreakerDr. Housing BubbleFalkenblogFibozachiFund My Mutal FundGains Pains & CapitalGlobal Economic AnalysisGonzalo LiraImplode-ExplodeInfectious GreedInvesting ContrarianJesse’s Café Américain Market FollyMax KeiserMinyanvilleMises InstituteNaked CapitalismOf Two MindsOilPrice.comPension PulseShanky’s TechBlogThe Daily CruxThe Mad Hedge Fund TraderThe Market TickerThe Technical TakeThe Underground InvestorWall St. Cheat SheetWashington’s BlogWealth.netWhen Genius Prevailed Home 4closureFraud's picture Submitted by 4closureFraud on 10/27/2010 20:15 -0500

Deutsche BankFloridaTestimony

~

Onewest Bank, F.S.B. v Drayton
2010 NY Slip Op 20429
Decided on October 21, 2010
Supreme Court, Kings County
Schack, J.

~

In this foreclosure action, plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. (ONEWEST), moved for an order of reference and related relief for the premises located at 962 Hemlock Street, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4529, Lot 116, County of Kings), upon the default of all defendants. The Kings County Supreme Court Foreclosure Department forwarded the motion papers to me on August 30, 2010. While drafting this decision and order, I received on October 14, 2010, in the midst of the present national media attention about “robo-signers,” an October 13, 2010-letter from plaintiff’s counsel, by which “[i]t is respectfully requested that plaintiff’s application be withdrawn at this time.” There was no explanation or reason given by plaintiff’s counsel for his request to withdraw the motion for an order of reference other than “[i]t is our intention that a new application containing updated information will be re-submitted shortly.”

The Court grants the request of plaintiff’s counsel to withdraw the instant motion for an order of reference. However, to prevent the waste of judicial resources, the instant foreclosure action is dismissed without prejudice, with leave to renew the instant motion for an order of [*2]reference within sixty (60) days of this decision and order, by providing the Court with necessary and additional documentation.

First, the Court requires proof of the grant of authority from the original mortgagee, CAMBRIDGE HOME CAPITAL, LLC (CAMBRIDGE), to its nominee, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. (MERS), to assign the subject mortgage and note on March 16, 2009 to INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB (INDYMAC). INDYMAC subsequently assigned the subject mortgage and note to its successor, ONEWEST, on May 14, 2009.

Second, the Court requires an affidavit from Erica A. Johnson-Seck, a conflicted “robosigner,” explaining her employment status. A “robo-signer” is a person who quickly signs hundreds or thousands of foreclosure documents in a month, despite swearing that he or she has personally reviewed the mortgage documents and has not done so. Ms. Johnson-Seck, in a July 9, 2010 deposition taken in a Palm Beach County, Florida foreclosure case, admitted that she: is a “robo-signer” who executes about 750 mortgage documents a week, without a notary public present; does not spend more than 30 seconds signing each document; does not read the documents before signing them; and, did not provide me with affidavits about her employment in two prior cases. (See Stephanie Armour, “Mistakes Widespread on Foreclosures, Lawyers Say,” USA Today, Sept. 27, 2010; Ariana Eunjung Cha, “OneWest Bank Employee: Not More Than 30 Seconds’ to Sign Each Foreclosure Document,” Washington Post, Sept. 30, 2010).

In the instant action, Ms. Johnson-Seck claims to be: a Vice President of MERS in the March 16, 2009 MERS to INDYMAC assignment; a Vice President of INDYMAC in the May 14, 2009 INDYMAC to ONEWEST assignment; and, a Vice President of ONEWEST in her June 30, 2009-affidavit of merit. Ms. Johnson-Seck must explain to the Court, in her affidavit: her employment history for the past three years; and, why a conflict of interest does not exist in the instant action with her acting as a Vice President of assignor MERS, a Vice President of assignee/assignor INDYMAC, and a Vice President of assignee/plaintiff ONEWEST. Further, Ms. Johnson-Seck must explain: why she was a Vice President of both assignor MERS and assignee DEUTSCHE BANK in a second case before me, Deutsche Bank v Maraj, 18 Misc 3d 1123 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2008); why she was a Vice President of both assignor MERS and assignee INDYMAC in a third case before me, Indymac Bank, FSB, v Bethley, 22 Misc 3d 1119 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2009); and, why she executed an affidavit of merit as a Vice President of DEUTSCHE BANK in a fourth case before me, Deutsche Bank v Harris (Sup Ct, Kings County, Feb. 5, 2008, Index No. 35549/07).

Background

Defendant COVAN DRAYTON (DRAYTON) executed the subject [*3] mortgage and note on January 12, 2007, borrowing $492,000.00 from CAMBRIDGE. MERS “acting solely as a nominee for Lender [CAMBRIDGE]” and “FOR PURPOSES OF RECORDING THIS MORTGAGE, MERS IS THE MORTGAGEE OF RECORD,” recorded the instant mortgage and note on March 19, 2007, in the Office of the City Register of the City of New York, at City Register File Number (CRFN) 2007000143961. Plaintiff DRAYTON allegedly defaulted in his mortgage loan payment on September 1, 2008. Then, MERS, as nominee for CAMBRIDGE, assigned the instant nonperforming mortgage and note to INDYMAC, on March 16, 2009. Erica A. Johnson-Seck executed the assignment as a Vice President of MERS, as nominee for CAMBRIDGE. This assignment was recorded in the Office of the City Register of the City of New York, on March 24, 2009, at CRFN 200900084809. However, as will be discussed below, there is an issue whether MERS, as CAMBRIDGE’s nominee, was authorized by CAMBRIDGE, its principal, to assign the subject DRAYTON mortgage and note to plaintiff INDYMAC. Subsequently, almost two months later, Ms. Johnson-Seck, now as a Vice President of INDYMAC, on May 14, 2009, assigned the subject mortgage and note to ONEWEST. This assignment was recorded in the Office of the City Register of the City of New York, on May 22, 2009, at CRFN 2009000155018.

Plaintiff ONEWEST commenced the instant foreclosure action on June 18, 2009 with the filing of the summons, complaint and notice of pendency. On August 6, 2009, plaintiff ONEWEST filed the instant motion for an order of reference. Attached to plaintiff ONEWEST’s moving papers is an affidavit of merit by Erica A. Johnson-Seck, dated June 30, 2009, in which she claims to be a Vice President of plaintiff ONEWEST. She states, in 1, that “[t]he facts recited herein are from my own knowledge and from review of the documents and records kept in the ordinary course of business with respect to the servicing of this mortgage.” There are outstanding questions about Ms. Johnson-Seck’s employment, whether she executed sworn documents without a notary public present and whether she actually read and personally reviewed the information in the documents that she executed.

July 9, 2010 deposition of Erica A. Johnson-Seck in the Machado case

On July 9, 2010, nine days after executing the affidavit of merit in the instant action, Ms. Johnson-Seck was deposed in a Florida foreclosure action, Indymac Federal Bank, FSB, v Machado (Fifteenth Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, Case No. 50 2008 CA 037322XXXX MB AW), by defendant Machado’s counsel, Thomas E. Ice, Esq. Ms. Johnson-Seck admitted to being a “robo-signer,” executing sworn documents outside the presence of a notary public, not reading the documents before signing them and not complying with my prior orders in the Maraj and Bethley decisions.

Ms. Johnson-Seck admitted in her Machado deposition testimony that she was not employed by INDYMAC on May 14, 2009, the day she assigned the subject mortgage and note to ONEWEST, even though she stated in the May 14, 2009 assignment that she was a Vice President of INDYMAC. According to her testimony she was employed on May 14, 2010 by assignee ONEWEST.

Then the Schack goes on to say later in the decision…

Then, plaintiff ONEWEST must address the tangled employment situation of “robosigner” Erica A. Johnson-Seck. She admitted in her July 9, 2010 deposition in the Machado case that she never provided me with affidavits of her employment for the prior three years and an explanation of why she wore so-many corporate hats in Maraj and Bethley. Further, in Deutsche Bank v Harris, Ms. Johnson-Seck executed an affidavit of merit as Vice President of Deutsche Bank. If plaintiff renews its motion for an order of reference, the Court must get to the bottom of Ms. Johnson-Seck’s employment status and her “robo-signing.” The Court reminds plaintiff ONEWEST’s counsel that Ms. Johnson-Seck, at p. 161 of the Machado deposition, volunteered, at lines 4 – 5 to “gladly show up in his court and provide him everything he wants.”

Lastly, if plaintiff ONEWEST’S counsel moves to renew its application for an order of reference, plaintiff’s counsel must comply with the new filing requirement to submit, under penalties of perjury, an affirmation that he has taken reasonable steps, including inquiring of plaintiff ONEWEST, the lender, and reviewing all papers, to verify the accuracy of the submitted documents in support of the instant foreclosure action.

Conclusion

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED, that the request of plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., to withdraw its motion for an order of reference, for the premises located at 962 Hemlock Street, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4529, Lot 116, County of Kings), is granted; and it is further

ORDERED, that the instant action, Index Number 15183/09, is dismissed without prejudice; and it is further

ORDERED, that the notice of pendency in the instant action, filed with the Kings County Clerk on June 18, 2009, by plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., to foreclose a mortgage for real property located at 962 Hemlock Street, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4529, Lot 116, County of Kings), is cancelled; and it is further

ORDERED, that leave is granted to plaintiff, ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., to renew, within sixty (60) days of this decision and order, its motion for an order of reference for the premises located at 962 Hemlock Street, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4529, Lot 116, County of Kings), provided that plaintiff, ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., submits to the Court: (1) proof of the grant of authority from the original mortgagee, CAMBRIDGE CAPITAL, LLC, to its nominee, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., to assign the subject mortgage and note to INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB; and (2) an affidavit by Erica A. Johnson-Seck, Vice President of plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., explaining: her employment history for the past three years; why a conflict of interest does not exist in how she acted as a Vice President of assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., a Vice President of assignee/ assignor INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB, and a Vice President of assignee/plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. in this action; why she was a Vice President of both assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. and assignee DEUTSCHE BANK in Deutsche Bank v Maraj, 18 Misc 3d 1123 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2008); why she was a Vice President of both assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. and assignee INDYMAC BANK, FSB in Indymac Bank, FSB, v Bethley, 22 Misc 3d 1119 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2009); and, why she executed an affidavit of merit as a Vice President of DEUTSCHE BANK in Deutsche Bank v Harris (Sup Ct, Kings County, Feb. 5, 2008, Index No. 35549/07); and (3) counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. must comply with the new Court filing requirement, announced by Chief Judge [*17] Jonathan Lippman on October 20, 2010, by submitting an affirmation,using the new standard Court form, pursuant to CPLR Rule 2106 and under the penalties of perjury, that counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. has personally reviewed plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s documents and records in the instant action and counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. confirms the factual accuracy of plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s court filings and the accuracy of the notarizations in plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s documents.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

Link to full decision below…

Check it out…

It is fascinating…

~

4closureFraud.org

~

LINK – Onewest Bank, F.S.B. v Drayton 5 Your rating: None Average: 5 (8 votes)
» Share/Save Login or register to post commentsPrinter-friendly versionSend to friend

by Coldfire
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 22:01
#682294

A good decision. Even if you buy the line put out 24/7 by the MSM that these kinds of cases are simply a kerfuffle about paperwork, you can easily see the glaring opportunities for fraud baked into the mortgage and assignment process. To simply assume these opportunities were not acted on requires a degree of active ignorance bordering on the delusional.

Login or register to post comments by zaknick
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 22:04
#682301

O/T

 

Some ignorant jerk last night was attempting to defend the genocidal scum that destroyed America. LET THIS BE A LESSON TO YOU:

 

While reading ZH last night I came across a discussion between yourself and some uninformed person the topic of which was Bush and Nazism. What I’d like to bring to your attention is the fact that it wasn’t some isolated incident where Bush and friends (a bunch of old time Wall St interests and industrialists) were inflicting evil upon some innocent and unknowing people. No, these people have a very long and horrifying history.

I’ll give you a timeline of their continuous acts of genocide (along with documenting, credible sources), at least the ones I’ve discovered although every time I dig a bit more some new horrifying fact flies out which fits perfectly with the ethos of their chronicles.

Bankster history 101 (which is where these people come from):

http://www.scribd.com/full/37179258?access_key=key-1cuxpp2jlyrgxlh33vds

The first chronological incident tying these families together, to my knowledge, starts with the passage of the Fed Res Act in 1913, the murder of Sen Louis McFadden, and Rockefeller corrupting Delaware functionaries in order to allow his corporation to exist; prior to that time corporations needed to show they would serve the public interests and were not perpetual. (these are not that secret and can be found with a simple search)

The next incident is the ethnic cleansing carried out in the US during the 1920s which the US supreme court approved (in a rigged case):

Carrie Buck v. James Hendren Bell, Superintendent of State Colony
for Epileptics and Feeble Minded
Citations 274 U.S. 200 (more)
47 S. Ct. 584; 71 L. Ed. 1000

The ruling was written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. In
support of his argument that the interest of the states in a “pure”
gene pool outweighed the interest of individuals in their bodily
integrity, he argued: We have seen more than once that the
public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It
would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap
the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices, often not
felt to be such by those concerned, in order to prevent our being
swamped with incompetence. It is better for all the world, if
instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to
let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who
are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that
sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting
the Fallopian tubes.

Holmes concluded his argument with the infamous phrase “Three
generations of imbeciles are enough”.

They were unable to carry out the thorough, documented process for lack of database technology. Prescott Bush, Carnegie, Rockefeller foundations were all behind this.

Edwin Black, jewish researcher of the German ethnic cleansing in the 1940s, found their older history when he found the IBM Nazi connection. IBM’s database technology was what allowed the Germans to ethnic cleanse you, your sister, brother, cousins etc. That is why the earlier one failed. He wrote a couple of books including Nazi Nexus and War on the Weak. Here’s a chat about War on the Weak:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9014940408212321489#

This man also states that there was a connection between the Rockefeller foundation and Mengele’s overseer. It’s in one of his chats. See, it wasn’t just a business connection between Thyssen and Bush; it was part of a much larger ethos and yes, conspiracy.

They were also behind a coup attempt in 1933:

During the 1950s Prescott Bush ran for the US senate and lost when a last minute rumor linking him with the old Birth Control League (yes, you heard correctly: the BIRTH CONTROL LEAGUE which is shy George HW Bush was called “rubbers” as in condoms when he was in Congress in the sixties pushing this:

Congressional record in the
1960’s:

Population Task Force

Among Bush’s most important contributions to the neo-Malthusian cause while
in Congress was his role in the Republican Task Force on Earth Resources
and Population. The task force, which Bush helped found and then chaired,
churned out a steady stream of propaganda claiming that the world was
already seriously overpopulated; that there was a fixed limit to natural
resources and that this limit was rapidly being reached; and that the
environment and natural species were being sacrificed to human progress.
Bush’s task force sought to accredit the idea that the human race was being
“down bred,” or reduced in genetic qualities by the population growth among
blacks and other non-white and hence allegedly inferior races at a time
when the Anglo-Saxons were hardly able to prevent their numbers from
shrinking.
Comprised of over 20 Republican Congressmen, Bush’s Task Force was a kind
of Malthusian vanguard organization which heard testimony from assorted
“race scientists,” sponsored legislation and otherwise propagandized the
zero-growth outlook. In its 50-odd hearings during these years, the task
force provided a public forum to nearly every well-known zero-growth
fanatic, from Paul Ehrlich, founder of Zero Population Growth (ZPG), to
race scientist William Shockley, to the key zero-growth advocates infesting
the federal bureaucracy.
Giving a prestigious congressional platform to a discredited racist
charlatan like William Shockley in the year after the assassination of Dr.
Martin Luther King, points up the arrogance of Bush’s commitment to
eugenics. Shockley, like his co-thinker Arthur Jensen, had caused a furor
during the 1960s by advancing his thesis, already repeatedly disproven,
that blacks were genetically inferior to whites in cognitive faculties and
intelligence. In the same year in which Bush invited him to appear before
the GOP task force, Shockley had written: “Our nobly intended welfare
programs may be encouraging dysgenics — retrogressive evolution through
disproportionate reproduction of the genetically disadvantaged…. We fear
that ‘fatuous beliefs’ in the power of welfare money, unaided by eugenic
foresight, may contribute to a decline of human quality for all segments of
society.”

During hearings on the Social Security amendments, Bush and witness
Alan Guttmacher had the following colloquy: Bush: Is there any
[opposition to Planned Parenthood] from any other organizations or
groups, civil rights groups?
Guttmacher: We do have problems. We are in a sensitive area in
regard particularly to the Negro. There are some elements in the
Negro group that feel we are trying to keep down the numbers. We are
very sensitive to this. We have a community relations department
headed by a most capable Negro social worker to try to handle that
part of the problem. This does, of course, cause us a good bit of
concern.
Bush: I appreciate that. For the record, I would like to say I am
1,000 percent in accord with the goals of your organization. I
think perhaps more than any other type of organization you can do
more in the field of poverty and mental health and everything else
than any other group that I can think of. I commend you.

This is an excerpt of Bush’s unauthorized biography:

http://tarpley.net/online-books/george-bush-the-unauthorized-biography/

They killed Martin Luther King as his family’s wrongful death civil suit against the CIA et al jury said in the late nineties. No MSM covered it. They also killed Malcolm X, JFK and a lot of other people. A credible JFK investigation :  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=srstQVfVNEM

List of people they’ve murdered (google their names and their stories will come up):

USMC Colonel Sabow
Pulitzer Prize winner Gary Webb
Journalist Danny Casolaro
Ex-mil intel Steve Kangas who wrote this: http://www.scribd.com/full/23098198?access_key=key-gfuw42onruwfrrhw413
US Special Forces Colonels Edward P Cutolo, Baker, and one other whose name escapes me (all in the same incident).
Here’s International Committee of the Red Cross investigator David Guyyat on this incident and background info:
http://www.scribd.com/full/23098845?access_key=key-1zc7ubdmfbsl0rixgkfp

As you can see, they are the real drug cartels and here’s a good recap of what is known about their activities:

Here’s where he first came to light when opposing CIA director Deutch ( a Bush stooge) in a LA townhall after Iran Contra came to light (Ricky Ross is an interesting figure in this case)

Dois Gene “Chip” Tatum who wrote the Tatum Chronicles (very interesting) and whose testimony you can find on YouTube in an interview with 30 year FBI veteran Ted Gunderson (the ones on the beach have more info):

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=tatum+%22Ted+Gunderson%22&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=

This man’s testimony confirms the accusations:  http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=beau+abbott&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=.

Anyways, a good recap in written form of the decades long CIA drug trafficking is Rodney Stich’s Drugging America: A Trojan Horse:

So, the old Birth Control league became Family Planning after WWII when eugenics became taboo. Margaret Sanger was their shill. I and many others believe the “war on drugs is really their new ethnic cleansing technique:

The “war on drugs” results:

http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Web_Links&l_op=visit&lid=152

How it is done:

The overall picture:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=search_videos&search_query=the+new+jim+crowe+alexander&search_sort=relevance&search_category=0&page=

Keep in mind George HW Bush’s intent while in Congress (see above) for this man above any other is the architect of the modern day “war on drugs” (as opposed to Prohibition which was also their little fascist games). Yet, if you can believe it, he founded the Medellin Cartel with Jorge Luis Ochoa and Pablo Escobar.

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22allen+rudd%22+%22pablo+escobar%22+bush&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a

Most of the results are on target.

Ok so now you have some idea of who these people are, where they come from and how they literally get away with genocide. The why is because it’s class warfare and lust for empire. The 1960s Great Society “war on poverty” made them rebel following Ayn Rand’s (a Rothschild concubine) Atlas Shrugged ethos which also fits with their offshoring (gutting) of the US economy.

Most of the people mentioned on here have YouTube vids and plenty of documentation. Just google them.

Anyways, if you google all these names and situations, read patiently for weeks, you’ll get the full picture. Oh, here’s another good documentary on the Bushes:

http://www.google.com/search?q=%22russ+baker%22+bush+secrets&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a#q=%22russ+baker%22+bush+secrets&hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=pky&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&prmd=ivo&source=lnms&tbs=vid:1&ei=hubITNDDKMT48AaYvcEb&sa=X&oi=mode_link&ct=mode&ved=0CAgQ_AU&fp=30d26a1c0ffaa64e

I hope next time you can blast any nitwit or troll who would dare to support this modern day Caligula.

Best.

Nick

Login or register to post comments by Sean7k
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 22:59
#682405

Nicely done.

Login or register to post comments by tony bonn
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 23:06
#682414

it’s never off topic to bring up the murders of the bush crime syndicate….in honor of their many vicitims justice and righteousness demand that the scum bags be exposed for the murdering filth that they are.

Login or register to post comments by williambanzai7
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 22:40
#682373

Keep up the good work!

Login or register to post comments by rocker
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 22:57
#682402

Your stuff is not bad. Game on to both.

Login or register to post comments by George Washington
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 23:02
#682410

Thanks, 4ClosureFraud!

Login or register to post comments by Precious
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 23:17
#682422

Judge says (paraphrasing) “In other words boys and girls, you show up here again with another lying pile of shit, and it’s going to be curtains for your respective legal careers.”

Login or register to post comments by A Man without Q…
on Thu, 10/28/2010 – 01:27
#682609

I think it’s more than that.  I think that unless Erica A. Johnson-Seck can demonstrate that she hasn’t perjured herself in court, she’s going to jail…

Login or register to post comments by Miles Kendig
on Wed, 10/27/2010 – 23:58
#682497

Good one.

Now it’s time for the Justice Department to step in and claim national security imperatives since that is working so well over at Treasury, the fed and the rest of that rat trap.

Login or register to post comments by Fed Supporter
on Thu, 10/28/2010 – 01:37
#682613

Sorry this is so long, but I have been emailing local commissioners, courts, AG’s office and representatives and Governor.  We will see if any of it gets through.  Anyone can copy and email as well as I have cited all articles.  Please excuse any typos.

                                                      ——————————————————————————————Dear County Commissioners,Please review the articles below, I think they might be of interest to the counties in our state.  It appears MERS (Mortgage Electronic Recording System) may be fraudulently evading recording fees each time a mortgage changes hands or is assigned after it is sold.  As well, there may be even greater concerns as MERS has side stepped land recording laws and the chain of titles might be broken.  Essentially as Professor Peterson states  below MERS has essentially privatized property ownership rules.  Please read the full articles that Professor Peterson has written, they are linked below.  And finally MERS appears to be a shell corporation with no employees, no capital, and admits it has no financial interest in any mortgage notes.  As well MERS sells Vice President Stamps for $25.00, so essentially an employee for a law firm or loan servicer can assign mortgage notes from MERS to themselves the foreclosing party.  
Regards,—————————————————————————–http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-mortgage-foreclosure-20101021,0,4933760.story
The lawsuit, filed in Lassen County, accused MERS of costing California’s counties $60 billion to $120 billion in property recording fees since it began operations.

“What we see is a systematic, industrywide fraudulent scheme in which the true owners of the loan do not participate in the foreclosure,” said Robert Hager, a Reno lawyer for borrowers.

MERS also allowed banks to avoid the trouble — and the recording fee of up to $50 — of filing deeds and other documents at county registrars’ offices every time ownership of a mortgage changed hands.

It did that by listing itself as the owner of the mortgages on official property documents, even though it was simply a stand-in, or nominee, for the real owner listed in its database.

“It’s not like this is some minor loophole or technicality,” said Christopher Peterson, a law professor at the University of Utah who has studied MERS and has consulted on some lawsuits against the company.

MERS neither received payments from the borrower nor the proceeds from a foreclosure, he said, so it was “silly” for it to say it was the owner of the loan.
“In the American mortgage lending industry, MERS has become the veiled man wielding the foreclosure ax,” Peterson wrote this summer in the University of Cincinnati Law Review.
But MERS is facing growing criticism as more attention is focused on it. Local officials have long been concerned about the loss of fees caused by putting mortgages in MERS’ name, essentially privatizing property ownership records, said Mark Monacelli, the St. Louis County, Minn., recorder, who has been active on the issue since MERS was created.————————————————————————————————————————http://www.law.utah.edu/faculty/faculty-profile/?id=christopher-petersonChristopher L. Peterson    Associate Dean for Academic Affairs Professor of Law

CONTACT INFORMATION

christopher.peterson@law.utah.edu
Phone: 801-581-6655
Fax: 801-581-6897

University of Utah
S.J. Quinney College of Law
332 S. 1400 E., Room 101
Salt Lake City, UT 84112

Foreclosure, Subprime Mortgage Lending, and the Mortgage Electronic Registration SystemChristopher Lewis Peterson 
University of Utah – S.J. Quinney College of Law

University of Cincinnati Law Review, Vol. 78, No. 4, 2010 

Abstract:      
At the roots of the worst recession since the Great Depression were unaffordable home mortgages packaged into securities, sold to investors, and used as capital assets by financial institutions. The process of securitization, as well as financial institution over-leveraging associated with it, has been well documented and explored. However, there is one company that was a party to more questionable loans and foreclosures than any other and yet has received virtually no attention in the academic literature. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., commonly referred to as “MERS,” is the recorded owner of over half of the nation’s residential mortgages. MERS operates a computer database designed to track servicing and ownership rights of mortgage loans anywhere in the United States. But, it also acts as a proxy for the real parties in interest in county land title records. Most importantly, MERS is also filing foreclosure lawsuits on behalf of financiers against hundreds of thousands of American families. This Article explores the legal and public policy foundations of this odd, but extremely powerful, company that is so attached to America’s financial destiny. It begins with a brief explanation of the origins of the county real property recording systems and the law governing real property liens. Then, it explains how MERS works, why mortgage bankers created the company, and what MERS has done to transform the underlying assumptions of state real property recording law. Next, it explores controversial doctrinal issues confronting MERS and the companies that have relied on it, including (1) whether MERS actually has standing to bring foreclosure actions; (2) whether MERS should be considered a debt collector under the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act; and (3) whether loans recorded in MERS’ name should have priority in various collateral competitions under state law and the federal bankruptcy code. The article culminates in a discussion of MERS’ culpability in fostering the mortgage foreclosure crisis and what the long term effects of privatized land title records will have on our public information infrastructure. The Article concludes by considers whether the mortgage banking industry, in creating and embracing MERS,has subverted the democratic governance of the nation’s real property recording system.

——————————————————————————
Two Faces: Demystifying the Mortgage Electronic Registration System’s Land Title Theory
Christopher Lewis Peterson 
University of Utah – S.J. Quinney College of Law

Real Property, Probate and Trust Law Journal, Forthcoming 

Abstract:      
Hundreds of thousands of home foreclosure lawsuits have focused judicial scrutiny on the Mortgage Electronic Registration System (“MERS”). This Article updates and expands upon an earlier piece by exploring the implications of state Supreme Court decisions holding that MERS is not a mortgagee in security agreements that list it as such. In particular this Article looks at: (1) the consequences on land title records of recording mortgages in the name of a purported mortgagee that is not actually mortgagee as a matter of law; (2) whether a security agreement that fails to name an actual mortgagee can successfully convey a property interest; and (3) whether county governments may be entitled to reimbursement of recording fees avoided through the use of false statements associated with the MERS system. This Article concludes with a discussion of steps needed to rebuild trustworthy real property ownership records.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

From MERS web site advertising why it is good to use them:  

 

http://www.mersinc.org/why_mers/mom.aspx

 

MOM Loans

 

To eliminate the need for assignments and to realize the greatest savings, lenders should close loans using standard security instruments containing language approved by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which name MERS as Original Mortgagee (MOM). Sample documents are availablehere.

Benefits of MOM Loans:

Faster executionReduction of shipping time and expensesElimination of documentation errorsSimplification of loan closing processMoney savings
Assignments eliminated forever ($30 saved per loan)No correction costs (up to $30 saved per document)No tracking costsNo correspondent or broker document penaltiesOne deed of trust or mortgage form for all transactionsMOM Makes It Work

The following revised MOM language must be used on the revised security instrument. After July 2000, only the revised security instrument may be used. Please see Fannie/Freddie Bulletins for further details. (April 26, 1999)

” MERS” is Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. MERS is a separate corporation that is acting solely as a nominee for Lender and Lender’s successors and assigns. MERS is the mortgagee under this Security Instrument. MERS is organized and existing under the laws of Delaware, and has an address and telephone number of P.O. Box 2026, Flint, MI 48501-2026, tel. (888) 679-MERS.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–http://www.zerohedge.com/article/citigroup-call-implications-foreclosure-crisis-just-tip-iceberg

 

Excerpt:

Citigroup’s homebuilding team hosted a call with investors in which the guest speaker was Adam Levitin, an associate professor of law at Georgetown University.

 

Issues Concerning Affidavits

When the aforementioned paperwork is lost, an agent of the mortgage servicer can sign an affidavit swearing that he or she has personal knowledge that, although now lost, the trustee was once in possession of the necessary documents. The affidavit is considered to have the same weight as sworn testimony in a court of law.

Two problems have emerged with regards to affidavits. First, several news stories have reported that the people signing these affidavits had no knowledge of the matters in question despite the fact that there were legally testifying that they did. Many of these people have since been labeled “robo-signers” given the tremendous volumes of affidavits which they signed in relatively short periods of time. Second, the affidavits may be irrelevant because the issue is not that the mortgage documents were lost but they were never properly transferred at each step of the aforementioned securitization process.

 

“Slowly but surely” courts are issuing decisions which “cast validity on the MERS process.” Although ~60% of mortgages list MERS as the “nominee” which owns the mortgage, a handful of recent court cases have ruled that MERS has no standing in foreclosure actions either because (1) physical paperwork must be transferred when a mortgage is assigned by one party to another or (2) MERS has no true economic interest in the mortgage in question since it collects no payments from the borrowers.”

 

—————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-http://www.zerohedge.com/article/brooklyn-beatdown-onewest-bank-fsb-v-drayton-judge-arthur-schack-decision-casts-light-robo-s
Onewest Bank, F.S.B. v Drayton – Judge Arthur Schack Decision Casts Light on Robo-Signers and Foreclosure Fraud

In the instant action, Ms. Johnson-Seck claims to be: a Vice President of MERS in the March 16, 2009 MERS to INDYMAC assignment; a Vice President of INDYMAC in the May 14, 2009 INDYMAC to ONEWEST assignment; and, a Vice President of ONEWEST in her June 30, 2009-affidavit of merit. Ms. Johnson-Seck must explain to the Court, in her affidavit: her employment history for the past three years; and, why a conflict of interest does not exist in the instant action with her acting as a Vice President of assignor MERS, a Vice President of assignee/assignor INDYMAC, and a Vice President of assignee/plaintiff ONEWEST. Further, Ms. Johnson-Seck must explain: why she was a Vice President of both assignor MERS and assignee DEUTSCHE BANK in a second case before me, Deutsche Bank v Maraj, 18 Misc 3d 1123 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2008); why she was a Vice President of both assignor MERS and assignee INDYMAC in a third case before me, Indymac Bank, FSB, v Bethley, 22 Misc 3d 1119 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2009); and, why she executed an affidavit of merit as a Vice President of DEUTSCHE BANK in a fourth case before me, Deutsche Bank v Harris (Sup Ct, Kings County, Feb. 5, 2008, Index No. 35549/07).

————————–

ORDERED, that leave is granted to plaintiff, ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., to renew, within sixty (60) days of this decision and order, its motion for an order of reference for the premises located at 962 Hemlock Street, Brooklyn, New York (Block 4529, Lot 116, County of Kings), provided that plaintiff,ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., submits to the Court: (1) proof of the grant of authority from the original mortgagee, CAMBRIDGE CAPITAL, LLC, to its nominee, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., to assign the subject mortgage and note to INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB; and (2) an affidavit by Erica A. Johnson-Seck, Vice President of plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B., explaining: her employment history for the past three years; why a conflict of interest does not exist in how she acted as a Vice President of assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., a Vice President of assignee/ assignor INDYMAC FEDERAL BANK, FSB, and a Vice President of assignee/plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. in this action; why she was a Vice President of both assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. and assignee DEUTSCHE BANK in Deutsche Bank v Maraj, 18 Misc 3d 1123 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2008); why she was a Vice President of both assignor MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. and assignee INDYMAC BANK, FSB in Indymac Bank, FSB, v Bethley, 22 Misc 3d 1119 (A) (Sup Ct, Kings County 2009); and, why she executed an affidavit of merit as a Vice President of DEUTSCHE BANK in Deutsche Bank v Harris (Sup Ct, Kings County, Feb. 5, 2008, Index No. 35549/07); and (3) counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. must comply with the new Court filing requirement, announced by Chief Judge [*17] Jonathan Lippman on October 20, 2010, by submitting an affirmation,using the new standard Court form, pursuant to CPLR Rule 2106 and under the penalties of perjury, that counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. has personally reviewed plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s documents and records in the instant action and counsel for plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B. confirms the factual accuracy of plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s court filings and the accuracy of the notarizations in plaintiff ONEWEST BANK, F.S.B.’s documents.

This constitutes the Decision and Order of the Court.

Link to full decision below…

Check it out…

It is fascinating…

Onewest Bank, F.S.B. v Drayton – Brooklyn Judge Arthur Schack is a Local Hero, Decision Casts Light on Fraudulent Mortgage Paperwork

—————————————————————————————————–

Dear Commissioners,

This is an actual ongoing lawsuit excerpted below.  Please note the deposition below concern MERS employees who also work for the attorney hired to bring the foreclosure action, which is to say the least a conflict of interest if not blatant fraud upon our courts.
I have taken the time to write to you to point out a few things.
1. MERS is not a valid owner of notes and uses deception to foreclose on homes.  The actual owner/trust needs to bring the foreclosure action.
2. MERS subverts local Recording laws and deprives the county of much needed fees.  Mortgages listed in MERS change hands quite frequently and each time it is not recorded locally, breaking the chain of title ownership and defrauding the county of recording fees.
See Attached Ruling by a Federal Bankruptcy Judge recently in Idaho:  Sheridan Decision.
Our state is a non judicial foreclosure state so there is no way for a person to challenge the standing of the party bringing foreclosure unless the person being foreclosed brings a separate action which in most cases is cost prohibitive.
The county can issue rules similar to Kenton County, Kentucky.  The rules which go into effect Nov. 15th are listed below.

“The order requires all foreclosure complaints in Kenton County to be accompanied by an affidavit certifying that the plaintiff is the owner and holder of the note and mortgage and identifying the plaintiff as the original holder or an assignee, trustee, or successor in interest of the original holder.

Kenton County foreclosure complaints must also be accompanied by a copy of the note and recorded mortgage with copies of all allonges, endorsements, and assignments necessary to document the chain of title to both the note and the mortgage.

The complaint must also include documents establishing the plaintiff as the successor in interest if any merger, change of trustee, or other transfer issue has taken place.”

Taking these steps as well, will protect County residents from being foreclosed upon by parties who have no standing, nor possession of the “Wet Ink Promissory Note” or by broken chain of title. If the foreclosing party can not document the chain of title they should not be allowed to foreclose. Please note that a lot of assignments are back dated and are executed by a person who works for a law firm and also is supposedly a Secretary or Vice President for MERS corp, which is well established as a shell corporation and by there own admission in numerous law suits do not have financial interest nor do they own the note in order to be assigning the note to themselves (the law firm filing the foreclosure documents).  As I understand the process, MERS, who has no financial interest in the note is granting attorneys and servicers to become employees of MERS in order to assign mortgages form MERS to the bank/servicer or attorney bringing the foreclosure action.
Please get back to me as to how we can better protect County residents.
Regards,———————————————————————————————————–

 

http://fedupusa.org/2010/10/27/cop-hearing-on-tarp-foreclosure-mitigation-programs/http://cop.senate.gov/hearings/library/hearing-102710-foreclosure.cfmCOP Hearing on TARP Foreclosure Mitigation Programs October 27th, 2010 |  Author: Stephanie

Very interesting hearing.  But the most-interesting part of it is right here….

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

The largest and most complex harm that may exist with the loans in default or foreclosure today is that the paperwork for the loans was not transferred correctly. I emphasize that what constitutes a correct transfer is a gray area; we need more direction from courts and legislatures on this subject. But there are plausible legal claims that the transfers of the notes and mortgages were not effective to give the trust full enforcement rights.…..

And it only gets better….

 

 

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

The implications of problems with transfer are serious. If the trust does not have the loan, homeowners may have been making payments to the wrong party. If the trust does not have the note or mortgage, it may not have standing to foreclose or legal authority to negotiate a loan modification. To the extent that these transfers are being completed retroactively, it raises issues about honesty in creating and dating the assignments/transfers and about what parties can do, if anything, if an entity in the securitization chain, such as Lehman Brothers or New Century, is no longer in existence. Moreover, retroactive transfers may violate the terms of the trust, which often prohibit the addition of new assets, or may cause the trust to lose its REMIC status, a favorable treatment under the Internal Revenue Code. Chain of title problems have the potential to expose the banks to investor lawsuits and to hinder their legal authority to foreclose or even to do loss mitigation.

And you thought that was it?  Oh no….

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

Another type of lawsuit risk is that consumers are able to sue the current holder of their note for violations that occurred at origination. Normally, these complaints fail because the holder of the note is thought to be a “holder in due course,” a person that receives protection from most of the claims that someone could bring against the originator of the note. However, if the notes do not meet the requirements of negotiable instruments, there cannot be a holder in due course. The person with the note merely is the possessor “bearer paper,” and can be sued for all wrongs associated with that note contract.

Now do you understand why nobody wants to come forward with the paper?  Well gee, what if the Trusts or worse servicers wind up with successor liability for the wrongs committed by the LENDERS?  (The trustees tend not to have much money – the servicers, on the other hand, are all the big banks…. oi!)

 

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

Finally, I want to share with the Panel that the lawyers that I have met over years of my research on mortgage servicing—both creditor lawyers and debtor lawyers—have nearly universally expressed that they believe a very large number (perhaps virtually all) securitized loans made in the boom period in the mid-2000s contain serious paperwork flaws, did not meet underwriting or other requirements of the trust, and have not been serviced properly as to default and foreclosure.

Oh, it’s not “just some paperwork” eh?  Yeah.

 

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

The second type of lawsuit that seems certain to follow the exposure of the flawed foreclosure procedure is a claim by investors that problems at loan origination, including a lack of paperwork to support a valid foreclosure, or mortgage servicing mishaps have increased their losses. These suits most obviously will seek to force the banks to “buy back” or “repurchase” loans that were improperly placed into a particular trust for securitization or were improperly originated. Investors could also argue for money damages for lost revenue stream or breach of fiduciary duty by the trust or the servicer to exercise good judgment in favor of in investors’ interests. These suits could be incredibly expensive for banks, requiring the payments of large claims to make investors whole and to satisfy the plaintiffs’ attorneys who will bring such cases.

Yep.  And those suits are just getting started.

 

http://fedupusa.org/wp-content/themes/old_glory_wp_theme_lr/images/PostQ…); font-weight: normal; background-position: 0% 0%; background-repeat: no-repeat no-repeat; ” dir=”ltr”>

But America does not have to continue in a “crisis.” We do not have to tolerate abuse of the legal system, systematic errors, bloated fees, and chaos in the housing and financial sector.

THANK YOU.

Now, let’s see the law come in and do the right thing.

We’re well beyond the point where this should have occurred, but all good movements start with one step.

And here’s the money quote:

If you don’t have time for three hours of testimony and questioning, you only need to listen to the this short little clip to “get it.”

Login or register to post comments by StychoKiller
on Thu, 10/28/2010 – 01:49
#682625

Off-Topic:  Someone was complaining about spammers in another thread, so here’s a potential solution:

http://xkcd.com/810/

Login or register to post comments Comment viewing options Flat list – collapsedFlat list – expandedThreaded list – collapsedThreaded list – expanded Date – newest firstDate – oldest first 10 comments per page30 comments per page50 comments per page70 comments per page90 comments per page150 comments per page200 comments per page250 comments per page300 comments per pageSelect your preferred way to display the comments and click “Save settings” to activate your changes. Search Search this site: Latest News From RAN Squawk 10-28 04:09: ENI (ENI IM) says Q3 adjusted net income EUR 1.720bln vs. Exp. EUR 1.34bln 10-28 04:05: Euribor Rate Fixing 10-28 04:00: ECB’s Stark says ECB bond buying program very humble in size 10-28 04:00: Eurozone Consumer Considence (Oct F) M/M -11 vs. Exp. -11 (Prev. -11) 10-28 04:00: Eurozone Business Climate Indicator (Oct) M/M 0.98 vs. Exp. 0.79 (Prev. 0.77, Rev. to 0.76) 10-28 03:59: ECB’s Stark says all support measures can be reduced step by step 10-28 03:57: ECB’s Stark says money markets not back to normal yet but normalising 10-28 03:56: Santander (SAN SM) says has no plans for acquisitions Latest News From The Fly On The Wall 10-27 18:01: SJW Corp. reports Q3 EPS 58c vs. consensus 50c 10-27 17:56: Northfield Bancorp reports Q3 adjusted EPS 9c vs. consensus 8c 10-27 17:45: Rent-A-Center increases share repurchase plan to $800M from $600M 10-27 17:44: California Water Service reports Q3 EPS 98c vs. consensus $1.00 10-27 17:43: Mosaic: South Fort Meade partial settlement to allow limited mining 10-27 17:40: Teradyne sees Q4 adjusted EPS 21c-28c vs. consensus 59c 10-27 17:39: Teradyne reports Q3 adjusted EPS 82c vs. consensus 79c 10-27 17:38: O’Reilly Automotive sees FY10 SSS 7%-8% The Zero Hedge Team

Tyler Durden – Founder

Marla Singer – Foil

Travis – Author

Cornelius – Author

Sacrilege – Senior Researcher

 

tips [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Our Reader Tips Mailbox

Make sure to read our “How To [Read/Tip Off] Zero Hedge Without Attracting The Interest Of [Human Resources/The Treasury/Black Helicopters]” Guide

ads [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Advertising Inquiries.

abuse [ at ] zerohedge [ dot ] com – Abuse / Infringement Issues

 

It would be very wise of you to study our disclaimer, our privacy policy and our (non)policy on conflicts / full disclosure.

 

Zero Hedge Offices:

United States:
888.qui.zero (888.784.9376)

Zurich:
+41 43 501 6717

London:
+44 20 3318 4753

copyright ©2009, 2010 zero hedge – limited reproduction (with attribution) permitted by request

zero hedge’s redundancy powered by:

Powered by Ubercart

View the Original article

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s