The Real Fraudsters: Banks or Homeowners like Barbara Bratton?


I was informed last night that Barbara Bratton—who sued U.S. Bank in 2012 over the foreclosure of her home in Ontario, California–was recently convicted on 6 counts of real estate fraud and now faces up to 6 years in prison.  From Highland Community News:

SAN BERNARDINO, Calif. – On April 14, a San Bernardino County jury returned a verdict of guilty on 6 counts of real estate fraud against 58-year-old Barbara Rae Bratton of Upland. Bratton was taken into custody immediately following the guilty finding.

In May 2013, the Ontario Police Department investigated Bratton on suspicion of filing two false grant deeds with the San Bernardino County Recorder’s Office on a house in the 900 block of Locust Street in Ontario. The false deeds were filed a month earlier by Bratton in a fraudulent attempt to take possession of a house she once owned and had lost to foreclosure.

According to District Attorney Sr. Investigation John Vega, who was assigned to the case, the house had been sold to new buyers who then purchased it legally.

“Ms. Bratton owned the house at one time, but had not made a mortgage payment on it for approximately four years resulting in the foreclosure, and two evictions, to finally remove her from the property,” Sr. Investigator Vega said.

Bratton argued in court that the house still belonged to her in spite of years of not making payments on the property. She continuously cited flawed legal theories that some people use to not pay home loans.

What this story refers to as “flawed legal theories” is what reasonable people with correctly calibrated bullshit detectors call “bank fraud.”  That is to say, banks routinely and as a matter of course do what Barbara Bratton is purported to have done, i.e., file false documents in county land records.  But not one banker has ever gone to jail for doing so.  Not one.

Some would say it’s just a loony conspiracy theory that banks do that.  Those same people would say that Bratton was a tin-foil-hatter, a “sovereign citizen” who thought everyone was out to get her and she was trying to get something for nothing, apparently the worst crime that can ever be committed.

Except it’s not a conspiracy theory that banks falsify documents—it’s a conspiracy fact.  For example, here’s a story from 2014 that undeniably proves just that:

This kind of manufacturing of evidence happens all the time, it’s just that usually, hard evidence of this criminal behavior is hard to come by.  However, Wiley got undeniable proof of it this time.  He got his hands on a Nationstar (who used to call themselves “Aurora”) internal memo which said this:

Wiley Paper Terrorism case

So the Feeneys were right–there was no assignment that gave Aurora/Nationstar the right to do anything. SO THEY (AURORA/NATIONSTAR) MADE ONE UP, BACKDATED IT, AND GOT A NOTARY TO SIGN OFF ON IT! And then filed it in the land records of Greene County, Missouri!

And of course, let’s not forget about Lorraine Brown of DocX, who was found guilty of falsifying over a million documents and then filing them in the land records of counties all across the country.  She of course was not an employee of a bank, but the documents she falsified were produced on behalf of banks!  She and DocX were the patsies for the criminality of the banks.

Hell, just yesterday, Living Lies published an article in which bank employees and mortgage servicing employees emailed each other back and forth about how best to falsify necessary documents to foreclose on a woman who is currently in such fragile health from a battle with cancer that some fear that her imminent eviction as a result of this falsification could literally kill her:

October 27, 2008

From: Michael Barnett

To: Diane Meistad

Subject: RE: Default Assignment Request loan (Fauley, Robynne)

Okay Diane, I had my manager look at this file with me and we have determined that we need the following assignments to correct the chain of assignments:

1) Corrective Assignment from WAMU TO Deutsche Bank (to correct the assignment from RFC to WAMU, which was recorded in error) & Note Allonge

2) Assignment from Deutsche Bank to RFC & Note Allonge

3) Assignment from RFC to LNV Corp (Note allonge in file already)

The assignment from RFC to WAMU was recorded in error so it is not needed. We also have 2 endorsements on the original Note WAMU to RFC to Deutsche Bank which should be cancelled, to correct the Endorsement chain on the Note. We will just need the okay from you via email to cancel these endorsements. Will this work for you? Thanks Michael.

[NOTE: MGC has decided what was done right and wrong in prior transactions for which it has no knowledge, and what now needs to be done in its own best interest to steal and harvest the home. The transfers to and from WAMU as described above would be fraud due to WAMU being defunct. Then there is the request to have RFC cancel out the endorsements and replace with allonges. The third request in the sequence states that an allonge is already in the file from RFC to LNV Corp even though there are no assignments, yet, to support that allonge. That allonge created by MGC is fraudulent, and represents yet another broken sequence in the chain of title.]

Four days after this last email on October 27, 2008, the following two attached assignments are recorded simultaneously in Clackamas County, Oregon (Recorded Assignments – October 31 2008 – Fauley). The first assignment (and I call it the “first” because of its fraudulently back-dated) is executed on “March 10, 2008″ and notarized as such by “Diane Meistad” – Notary Public – State of Minnesota.” The assignor is “Residential Funding Company, LLC fka Residential Funding Corporation” with no Assignee named. NO ASSIGNEE! However, the second assignment is executed on October 27, 2008 with the Assignor named as “Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas (formerly known as Bankers Trust Company) and the Assignee – “Residential Funding Company, LLC.” This assignment is also notarized by “Diane Meistad.” As admitted by Meistad above, RFC was not in title position to transfer the asset as of October 27, 2008. Yet, she acquiesced to MGC’s fraudulent conspiracy to forge, fabricate, and alter documents.

So, Diane Meistad, Michael Barnett, and all the rest of you who where involved in this deceit, this one’s on you. You are the only ones who can put a stop to this injustice. Robynne Fauley, who is elderly and very sick, has suffered immensely from your actions. In six-days she is scheduled to be evicted from her home. Fix this!

We can clearly see then, that the cops and the courts shouldn’t be going after Barbara Bratton or others like her.  They should be going after the banks, as Trump might say, “big league.”  Because Bratton was right—the bank did steal her home, as they have literally millions of others.  As I wrote about Bratton and her case back in 2013:

I want to be clear that I am in no way arguing that because U.S. Bank may be a “paper terrorist,” then that means that Barbara Bratton is a paper terrorist–I believe the exact opposite is true.  Indeed, the truth is the ultimate defense.  So the truth needs to be determined, namely: who is entitled to the house, Bratton or U.S. Bank?  As the consent order with U.S. Bank makes abundantly clear, along with the general fact pattern of the ongoing foreclosure crisis, there is more than enough evidence to come down in favor of Bratton.  So if Bratton is in fact the true owner of her property, then that necessarily means the following: the documents she filed are not forgeries but the documents that U.S. Bank filed are forgeries, and should be treated as such.

Throwing Barbara Bratton in jail does not fix the problem of real estate fraud, because the banks are still running wild and free and commit fraud on a scale that is orders of magnitude larger than anything Bratton or any private citizen like her could ever dream of committing.  Her sentence is itself just more fraud.  God help us.  And God help Kimi Vandyk, who sources say is apparently now in a similar situation in the Santa Barbara area.

About eggsistense

Writer, musician, cartoonist, human being
This entry was posted in Everything Is Rigged, Financial Terrorism, Foreclosure, Foreclosure fraud, Living Lies, US Bank and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to The Real Fraudsters: Banks or Homeowners like Barbara Bratton?

  1. David Seal says:

    I’ve seen several persons post about this, without even looking for it. It just comes up in my feed. You certainly have a point about the lack of transparency and accountability in the mortgage securitization world. This might not be what some want to hear, but I am also bothered by the fact that this woman has so many people who claim to be her friend or fellow foreclosure fighters, yet seemingly no one was able to stop her from doing this. Why? No competent attorney would recommend she take the action she took – because it could lead to exactly what happened. It’s totally predictable from where I sit. I don’t know the person or the case or the situation, but I am wondering if someone unqualified gave this woman bad advice. If so, that is sad, for both of them.

  2. Renoira says:

    As a homeowner, I have seen the abuse up close and personal. When the crisis hit, most attorneys didn’t know what was going on, either. It is a relatively new field and the information was sketchy at best. Some attorneys took advantage, as the attorney who deserted us two weeks before the appeal. When we sought help, 80% of the attorneys we queried said they had a conflict of interest due to their relationship with the banks.

    Thank you, David Seal, for getting us through our appeal, but prior to that, you know what we had to deal with.

    Ms. Bratton, who I know personally, sought the help of government officials who actually helped her by giving her the forms that got her arrested when filing them. There is much more to this story here than meets the eye, but it is indeed a sad tale of the lack of transparency in the mortgage industry and the double standard.

  3. David Seal says:

    hI Sherry – Just saw your response. You are welcome! I can’t comment on your other attorneys for various reasons, some of which you know and understand, I am sure!

    As to the last paragraph of your response, a government official handing her a standard form to be used for recording documents doesn’t mean the government set her up. What set her up was reading bad or mistaken legal theory, spread by persons who didn’t know what they were doing. That is what likely convinced her she could file a document which would make her mortgage vanish. You know the old saying about if it sounds to good to be true?

    And logically there are other obvious problems with it that one could glean without picking up a law book (or a keyboard). So, let’s say Borrower thinks lender XYZ really doesn’t have the rights to foreclose that it purports to have, when it pursues a nonjudicial foreclosure. And let’s say Borrower has their reasons for that – robosigning, dates of assignment, notarial problems – whatever. That doesn’t mean that no one owns the rights. It means only that, if she doesn’t know who owns the rights, she doesn’t know who owns the rights. So, Borrower is in a situation where the owner of those rights COULD be (1) lender XYZ, for reasons she is unaware of, (2) lender XYZ, because her legal analysis is not consistent with actual laws, or (3) some unknown entity. Borrower then goes and files documents to “correct” this which purport to say her obligations are fully discharged, and that she has no mortgage, and her loan is paid off in full with no lien or active deed of trust against it. That seems to be what happened here, doesn’t it?

    Can you see how that might be fraught with peril? Now in a judicial foreclosure state, XYZ would have to meet its burden of proof as a plaintiff in a judicial proceeding, and prove it has the rights or standing to foreclose. in a nonjudicial state, or in a nonjudicial proceeding, it has no burden, there is no court case, it just forecloses. And the only way to stop it is to file a lawsuit. That means the borrower is now the plaintiff. And therefore the borrower has the burden of proof. And when the borrower goes to court to contest this, the borrower is met with a powerful defense argument to the effect that XYZ doesn’t have to prove standing to pursue a nonjudicial foreclosure. If the plaintiff borrower can prove that XYZ is the wrong entity, it has a case. But that is a tough case to plead, much less prove. And that is why legislative reform is needed, and why a judicial system better would address these things.

    I don’t underestimate the difficulty of finding competent counsel for these cases. Or in knowing who is a competent counsel. It is true that most who understand wrongful foreclosure law are working for banks or servicers at law firms where they can’t take on homeowner cases which conflict. But they are out there! If anyone needs a referral in California, they can come to me and I’ll do my best to try to match them up with someone competent.

    When I see a borrower who has to go to jail because someone convinced her that she could make her mortgage vanish, I think the courts and prosecutors may be going about it the wrong way. Analogizing to drug crimes, they wised up a long time ago and stopped trying to bust every single casual user of controlled substances. They need to go after the “pushers” of bogus legal remedies and fake legal analysis. Those people should be behind bars, not their dupes.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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