The “ta-da” endorsements and other document fabrication schemes are not exclusive to Wells Fargo, as we all know. It’s just that Wells’ manual has become public knowledge. And of course, the point of all this document fabrication is to fool judges and/or give judges a halfway-plausible legal tool to rule against homeowners, as Neil Garfield notes:
“There can be little doubt about it. Documents that a real bank acting like a bank would have in its possession appear to be completely absent in most if not all loans that are “performing” (i.e., the homeowner is paying, even if the party they are paying isn’t the right and even if the loan has already been paid off). But as soon as the file becomes subject to foreclosure proceedings, documents miraculously appear showing endorsements, allonges, powers of attorney and assignments. According to a report from The Real Deal (New York Real Estate News), these are frequently referred to as “ta-da endorsements” a reference from magic acts where rabbits are pulled from the hat.
Such endorsements and other fabricated documents have been taken at face value by many judges across the country, despite vigorous protests from homeowners who were complaining about everything from “they didn’t have the documents before, so where did they get them?” to luring homeowners into false modifications that were designed to trap homeowners into foreclosure.”
Judges have to know what’s going on. They read the news. They’re not naive. We’re always told that judges can do whatever they want, and at some point one has to ask–if that is so, why does “whatever they want” almost always seem to be to throw homeowners in the street on the strength of fake documents?
Seriously–a lot of people, even attorneys, will defend judges that routinely find against homeowners. They don’t defend such decisions, necessarily, but they do defend the judges. At least publicly. They will say that judges are under pressure to clear the dockets, or the judge’s hands are tied because you didn’t say the magic words in your pleadings that would magically untie their magical hands so they could unleash magical justice.
However, at some point we have to ask ourselves, are the judges really dupes? That is, do they really buy all the BS that Wells Fargo and the other banks are feeding them? Do they really look at a case where there are affidavits swearing that an unendorsed note is true and correct and then suddenly a “ta-da”-endorsed note appears as a deus ex machina and say, “Yeah, I totally buy that?” Given the education and experience level of most judges that hear these cases, one would expect them to have pretty sensitive bullshit detectors.
The only other explanation is that the judges are somehow complicit. That’s an uncomfortable statement to make and even more uncomfortable to actually contemplate. And it seems almost impossible to pull off, but then again, it is being pulled off, as Garfield points out:
“The assumption that these are just loans that were to be enforced just like any other loans is naïve. The lending process described in the paperwork at the closings of these loans was a complete lie. The actual lender did not know the closing had occurred, never received the note and mortgage, nor any other instrument that protected the investor lenders. The borrower did not know the actual lender existed. Closing agent was at best negligent and at worst part of the scheme. Closing agent applied money from the investors to the closing of the “loan” and gave the paperwork that should’ve gone to the investors to third parties who didn’t have a dime invested in the deal. Later the investment banks would claim that they were suffering losses, but it was a lie, this time to the taxpayers and the government.
The reason the investment banks need to fabricate documentation is simply because their scheme required multiple sales of the same loan to multiple parties. They had to wait until they couldn’t wait any longer in order to pick a plaintiff to file a foreclosure lawsuit or pick a beneficiary who would appear out of nowhere to start the nonjudicial sale of property in which they were a complete stranger to the transaction.
The reason that homeowners should win in any reasonable challenge to a foreclosure action is that neither the forecloser nor the balance has been correctly stated. In many cases the balance “owed” by the borrower is negative! Yes that means that money is owed back to the borrower even know they stopped making payments. This is so counter intuitive that it is virtually impossible for most people to wrap their brains around this concept and that is exactly what Wall Street banks have been counting on and using against us for years.“
After all, it’s not like there’s ever been any proof that judges are in on a big plot. Oh, wait…
“(NaturalNews) A former county judge from Pennsylvania has been sentenced to 28 years in federal prison for reportedly abusing the criminal justice system by illegally jailing thousands of innocent children for cash. Mark Ciavarella Jr. was recently found guilty of accepting $1 million in bribes from the builders of two private juvenile detention centers in Luzerne County, which profited heavily from the many false convictions that filled its cells with innocent kids.”
That is, of course, an example of complicity by commission. But let’s not forget the example of complicity with the banks by the most favored method–omission:
But last week, a report from the inspector general of the Justice Department, Michael E. Horowitz, set the record straight. Sure enough, the report told us how hard the nation’s law enforcement officials had been investigating these cases. That is, hardly at all.
The report, called “Audit of the Department of Justice’s Efforts to Address Mortgage Fraud,” covers the period from 2009 to 2011. It vindicates anyone who ever questioned the government’s claim that the reason there weren’t more mortgage-related fraud cases is because the cases just weren’t there to be made.
Most of all, the report is depressing because it indicates that the Justice Department, our nation’s top law enforcement agency, is simply unequipped — or unwilling — to combat complex financial frauds.
Here is one of the report’s conclusions: “We found that, despite public statements by the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force and the department about the importance of pursuing financial fraud cases, including mortgage fraud, the F.B.I. Criminal Investigative Division ranked complex financial crimes as the lowest of the six ranked criminal threats within its area of responsibility, and ranked mortgage fraud as the lowest subcategory threat within the complex financial crimes category. Additionally, we found mortgage fraud to be a low priority, or not listed as a priority, for F.B.I. field offices in the locations we visited, including Baltimore, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York.”
Wonderful, at least the story is getting out. I have left long articles which explain in relative detail the scam…(s).. so let me correct one of the most important pieces which so many seem to be missing, The instruments themselves and the protections provided for within and why you can go to Federal courts fro violations. “In return for a loan I have received, I promise to pay US$1000,00.00” Now the court has no authority nor does any other to enforce anything not in the contract and yet that is exactly what is going on (involuntary servitude). The “In return for” is a condition precedent. It is a requirement of an action prior to the signing and delivery of the Note. He who breaches their obligation first can make no claims upon the other party. Thus everything they did was fraud and continues to be fraud. And these frauds are found in 18USC 471-474 and various others, creation of false obligations of the United States. These are crimes against the United States!!! And the United States is required to prosecute or they are in breach of their official duties and breach of fiduciary duties and thus accessories to these criminal acts. Time to clean house!! The Note being deposited into a general account constituted several other criminal acts and yet because payments were made in the manner you requested and you accepted them the contract was changed… but that change merely constituted the completion of the “transaction” value for value and at that moment the Note must be stamped “paid” or “paid in full” (depending upon the Deed of Trust (DOT) .. and the property re-conveyed. This is a requirement of the DOT. So they are in breach of the very instrument they pretend to be enforcing, which never was “enacted” because the purpose for which it was created never existed “to secure the debt evidenced by the Note”…. that s right it does NOT secure the Note but only the “debt” evidenced by the Note!!! Since there never was a “loan I have received” to “return” but rather a credit instrument “Note” was received first and the debt is owed by the banksters (Lender) which was fulfilled when they distributed the credit deposited into the account by electronic funds transfers derived from that account, the transaction was complete.. no harm no foul. But everything else is fraud!!! and outside the contract. And the copying of the Note which became “Obligations of the United States” once it was accepted by the Bank and Deposited as a Credit instrument, is all various forms of counterfeiting, false filings, fabrication of counterfeit instruments, false obligations, securities fraud, trust fraud, tax fraud…. etc.. everything that was or has ever been done with “the Note” or “the DOT” and every copy or likeness thereof and every “electronic plate used for reproduction thereof (MERS) is alllllllllll securities fraud and currency fraud, counterfeiting etc….. So to argue the assignments etc and all that stuff is still admitting there was a “Loan” to which you are liable. The “Nexis” is the beginning… “the transaction was complete your honor. They received a credit instrument from me of full face value which they deposited into an account and dispersed the funds derived therefrom as required for which they charged a fee and the transaction was complete. They have failed to perform as required under the DOT by returning the discharged Note marked “Paid” and re-convey the DOT as required. They are in breach and as such have no capacity to be granted relief of any sort until they comply with those provisions. Further your honor they have extorted funds under false and fraudulent pretenses and are obligated to return them immediately and I hereby Notice the court of the evidence on the record of their criminal activities in the exhibits a through x, thereby obligating this court and you as a “judicial officer” to investigate and insure these criminal activities are ceased or be guilty of an accessory thereto.”
Who can and is willing to help put together a simple federal case for counterfeit instruments? I just want to bring certain fabricate docs to the fed court and get a determination as to them being fraudulent.. nothing else…. anyone with knowledge? Don;t want to screw this up. Simple presentation of three or four docs which are fabricated and used in a court case and filed ion the land records, the evidence of the fraudulent nature, call the signer (robo) to the stand, and other testimony and evidence only as to the “authenticity” of the instruments/documents… nothing else. If you can or will help, oversee with knowledge, guide, direct, participate, please contact us at once. truthmonger6 at the gmail.com place that is email@example.com Would it be an action as “ex rel”… or some other? Can an individual bring an action based solely upon a violation of a USC? and or is it necessary to show injury as a result? or simply request a “Declaratory Judgement”?? Thanks ahead of time… truth monger one of the sovereign people the United States is obligated to protect. The State has failed to provide “…the equal protections of the law.” and are in breach of their duty and obligations as “an inseparable part of the Union and the United States Constitution is the supreme law of the land (see amd 14)
I thank you for posting this. Very informative. A case on this might work, but only if it were brought before the right judge. Might need to be a jury. I have been thinking the exact same thing: there needs to be a Credit River decision, but on a national level–one that, unlike the victory that Daly won, CAN be used across the country as instructive, if not precedential. Do you have any links to this info or to a blog of your own?
Wow how time flyes… it has been over a year since then… Care to share any updates, help with a 42 USC 1983? I figured out how to do that with these cases and though i am only reading your response and desire for a River decision I think I have it .. just need to get it all done properly…. Let me know… email above
Imagine if someone foreclosed on a one of these judges using their “no proof required” non-judicial bullshit just to see the reaction.. We need to go after judges, the way judges need to go after banks.. An existing pattern of misconduct is well established matter of fact.