Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Investors reportedly want bank to buy back $47 billion in securities...Do you blame them? The Banks better buy them back, they mortgages were never held in trust to begin with! The Banks can't sell the mortgage notes off, then foreclose on the houses they don't even own, and turn around and sell the house again! Which is what they have done, and want to continue doing. WHO WILL STOP THIS NONSENSE?

N.Y. Fed seeking money 
back from BofA
Investors reportedly want bank 

to buy back $47 billion in securities
Forcing BAC to Buy Back Mortgages
The New York Federal Reserve wants its money back from Bank of America.
CNBC reported Tuesday that the New York Fed and money management firm PIMCO are part a consortium of eight large institutions suing Bank of America for failing to correctly handle loans that were packaged into bonds. Bloomberg earlier reported that the consortium is seeking to force the bank to buy back $47 billion of mortgage bonds.
Bank of America said it would fight the move.
"If you think about people who come back and say, 'I bought a Chevy Vega, but I want it to be a Mercedes with a 12-cylinder,' we're not putting up with that," Bank of America Chief Executive Brian Moynihan said on a conference call with analysts.
"We want to enforce the holders' contract rights," Kathy Patrick, the lead attorney representing the bond holders, told CNBC. "Today's action begins the clock ticking ... If these issues of non-performance are not addressed and cured, then our clients will be able to enforce their rights in court."
CNBC said the New York Fed has an interest in the mortgage securities through the Maiden Lane Partnerships that it set up in 2008 to manage transactions involving Bear Stearns and AIG.
The move ratchets up the pressure on the financial sector over faulty foreclosures. Stocks dropped broadly on worries that Bank of America would be forced to buy back mortgages, and the cost of insuring the bank's debt surged in the credit default swap market.
advertisement | ad info
The lawsuit news came a day after Bank of America, the nation's largest bank, said it would resume foreclosure proceedings in some states, arguing that its procedures had been sound. Bank of America also posted a huge $7.65 quarterly loss Tuesday, mainly due to a charge related to credit and debit card reform legislation passed over the summer.
Bank of America shares have dropped more than 13 percent in the past several sessions since the bank announced a 50-state moratorium on foreclosures, which was scaled back Monday.Index Last Change
BAC 11.8 -0.54
Quotes delayed 15+ min.
The consortium of investors suing Bank of America said that some mortgages should never have been included in the mortgage securities in the first place, and that Bank of America's Countrywide Home Loan Servicing unit should force the original lenders to buy them back.
A "notice of nonperformance" filed by the investors gives the Bank of America unit 60 days to fix the issues in question. After a cure period, the investors can sue the bank. Spokesmen for PIMCO, BlackRock and the New York Fed declined to comment.
The salvo is the latest effort from investors to push losses from mortgage securities back onto banks that made the original loans. Investors say the loans did not meet the standards that bondholders were promised when they bought the securities.
The White House, which last week said it believe a nationwide foreclosure moratorium would harm the economy, warned banks Tuesday it would pursue them for any mortgage practices that violated the law.
Federal regulators are due to meet Wednesday to discuss the foreclosure crisis amid concerns it could impact the housing market and broader economy, White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said.
Attorneys general in 50 states last week launched a joint investigation into allegations that banks used shoddy and possibly fraudulent paperwork to evict delinquent borrowers from their homes.
Attendees at Wednesday's meeting will include Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, Housing and Urban Development Secretary Shaun Donovan and a top Justice Department official, Associate Attorney-General Thomas Perrelli, Gibbs said.
"Our concern has been ensuring the (foreclosure) process adequately complies with the law," he said.
Bank of America said Monday it plans to resume seizing more than 100,000 homes in 23 states next week. It said it has a legal right to foreclose despite accusations that documents used in the process were flawed.
Story: Housing starts up unexpectedly in September
"The basis for our foreclosure decisions is accurate," Dan Frahm, a Bank of America spokesman, said in announcing the bank's new approach.
Bank of America was the only lender to halt foreclosures in all 50 states. Other companies, including Ally Financial Inc.'s GMAC Mortgage unit, PNC Financial Services Inc. and JPMorgan Chase & Co., have halted tens of thousands of foreclosures after similar practices became public.
The controversy, which has drawn public outrage and sparked government probes, has raised new fears about threats to bank earnings and the health of the fragile housing market, which has been battered by falling prices and foreclosures of nearly 3 million homes since January 2007.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Sunday, October 10, 2010


Wells Fargo Enhances Mortgage Assistance
for At-Risk Wachovia Pick-a-Payment Customers

Company also will contribute $24 million for customer outreach and foreclosure prevention efforts in eight states

DES MOINES, Iowa — October 6, 2010

Wells Fargo & Co. (NYSE: WFC) announced today that beginning Dec. 18, 2010, through June 30, 2013, at-risk Wachovia Pick-a-Payment customers may be eligible to earn principal forgiveness by making on-time mortgage payments.  (Bold, underline added.)  [WHY WOULD THE ATTORNEY'S GENERAL AGREE TO ALLOW WELLS FARGO TO FORCE AT-RISK CUSTOMERS THREE YEARS TO QUALIFY BEFORE HONORING THEIR PRINCIPAL FORGIVENESS AGREEMENT?]  The company also will contribute about $24 million to eight states to enlist help in customer outreach, and to prevent or mitigate the impacts of foreclosures in these communities. The terms of this agreement have been contemplated in the company’s financial projections, and are expected to have no impact on third-quarter financial results.

The program is part of an agreement with attorneys general in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Nevada, New Jersey, Texas and Washington who expressed concerns about the manner in which pay-option mortgages were originally marketed by World Savings Bank and Wachovia, who originated these loans prior to merging with Wells Fargo in late 2008. The agreement expands on Wells Fargo’s existing home preservation efforts. Through August 2010, at-risk Wachovia Pick-a- Payment customers already had been given almost $3.4 billion in principal forgiveness.

“In light of the unprecedented changes in our economy, Wells Fargo will continue to work with leaders across the nation on steps to help stabilize communities,” said Mike Heid, co-president of Wells Fargo Home Mortgage.

“We are pleased that Wells Fargo has stepped forward and agreed to work with us in avoiding another wave of foreclosures in our states,” said Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard, the attorney general who led the eight-state effort. “Their willingness to add to their existing principal forgiveness program is important to help consumers facing hardships who are deeply underwater in their homes.”

By Dec. 18, 2010, the company will contact customers likely to be eligible for the new program via letters, and will maintain a dedicated helpline – including Spanish-speaking specialists – to assist borrowers. Borrowers who already have received a modification will not be eligible for the new program. Wells Fargo customers who originally took out mortgages through Wachovia or Golden West who are looking for information about the loan modification program can call 888-565-1422.

About Wells Fargo
Wells Fargo Home Mortgage is the nation’s leading mortgage lender and services one of every six mortgage loans in the nation. A division of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., it has a national presence in mortgage stores and banking stores, and also serves the home financing needs of customers nationwide through its call centers, Internet presence and third-party production channels.

Wells Fargo & Company (NYSE: WFC) is a nationwide, diversified, community-based financial services company with $1.2 trillion in assets. Founded in 1852 and headquartered in San Francisco, Wells Fargo provides banking, insurance, investments, mortgage, and consumer and commercial finance through more than 10,000 banking stores, 12,000 ATMs, the Internet (wellsfargo.com and wachovia.com), and other distribution channels across North America and internationally. With more than 278,000 team members, Wells Fargo serves one in three households in America. Wells Fargo & Company was ranked #19 on Fortune’s 2009 rankings of America’s largest corporations. Wells Fargo’s vision is to satisfy all our customers’ financial needs and help them succeed financially.

Citizen Reveals Loopholes 
Federal Regulations. 
Conglomerates own banks
Graham-Leach-Bliley Act
Save America One

(Non-Profit; Public Policy industry)

September 2010 — Present (2 months)

WFC HOLDINGS COPORATION 1998 'Norwest' continued surviving corporation restructured mortgage corporation and introduced in 2000 following Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act updates that allowed conglomerates to own banks.

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., a general purpose corporation, created in 2000 as a California Domestic For Profit entity who does not do consumer mortgages.

Deceptive advertising influenced consumers of to beleive 'Wells Fargo Bank' was a safe place consumers could bring their personal and real property.

Federal Resulations in 2003 requiring less documentation.

WFC HOLDINGS CORP Senior Management 2004 merged out of existence Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. and introduced in many states a new general purpose trade name of the subsidairy Wells Fargo Bank N.A. who does not do consumer mortgages.

Business operations continued non-stop in asset-securities transactions bypassing Wells Fargo Bank, National Association rather thru Wells Fargo Securities LLC, a subsidiary whose tranasactions as a pass-thru agency & one which does not report federal income taxes as documented by KPMG LLP provides compelling interest to investigate were the transactions buried so unlawful business acts could not be accurately reported by citizens since WFC HOLDIGNS CORPORATION did withhold accurate business statements and omitted facts creating False Statements, Misrepresentations, False Claims.

Example: Wells Fargo & Co. to Wells Fargo & Co. refinancing 2004-2008 thru Lehman Brothers Bank FSB.
Lehman INVESTOR & Wells Fargo Securities 3 days before consumer.close on securities side
Save America One

(Non-Profit; Public Policy industry)

September 2010 — Present (2 months)

Aurora Financial Services LLC spring map discloses one-way transactions flow into Lehman Commodities. Is this only since 2009?

Why is Lehman INVESTOR with MERS SERVICER ID active same day papers presented to consumer to review mortgage they were not allowed to cancel?

Why is the actual Lehman name and actual name of the subsidiary Structured Asset Securities Corporation SASCO - a general purpose corporation not on the legal documents?

Why is Wells & Bear Stearns & Co., & WFC HOLDINGS CORPORATION as the manufacturer on Wells to Wells refinancing transactions close 3 days prior to consumer. Wells Fargo Securities LLC a subsidiary - Norwest ... Wells Fargo & Co. Parent of Title Resource Group aka Related Financial LLC means what? Something when Wells Fargo Bank NA can make False Statements, False Claims, Misrepresentations. Indeed legal documents ordered by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage faxed and processed by Wells Financial and Wells Fargo Home Mortgage & Wells Fargo Securities LLC.

Third party's as Depositor to place currency into treasury of an entity of Wells Fargo Securities LLC (subsidairy) Agents Norwest ....

Wells Fargo Securities LLC KPMG LLP documented appears as a pass-thru agency and one who does not report federal income taxes.

Why did Lehman Brothers' allow Bear Stearns & Co. to provide no cost loans? (3) days prior to actual consumer mortgage? and Lehman INVESOR was allowed to move transactions thru WFC entities who did not report federal income taxes.

Why did Wells Fargo Home Mortgage division Wells Fargo Bank NA (subsidairy) never do consumer mortgages?

Why is Wells Fargo & Co in secret Parent of TRG - Title Resource Group? And Realogy subsidiaries and affiliates team members of WFC?


Wells Fargo Home Mortgage 
takes by deception 
consumer property 
real and personal to Lehman

Save America One
Non-Profit; Public Policy industry
Mary Cochrane
October 2010 – Present (1 month)

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage deceptively takes from consumers and give to investors their personal and real property benefitting from the secret exchanges.

What if September 2008 was directly related to the conglomerat WFC HOLDIGNS CORPORATION's financial profucts they manufactuered and placed into the public domain for consumer consumption?

What if the Senior Executive Management created with intent the supply chain to close with INVESTORS secretly withholding facts that actually created a product sold to consumers which is defective at time of sale?

What if loopholes in Federal Regulations approved by the Legislature giving supervisory authority to the Federal Administrative Agencies directly contributed to September 2008?

What if the loopholes yet exist and Frand-Dodd Act did nothing but allow the same conglomerates to remane their entities?

Wells Fargo Securities LLC (is a subsidiary) of WFC HOLDINGS CORPORATION the conglomerate. As documented by KPMG LLP (copy of pdf you'll find in my Linkedin Work Box). Read carefully and you'll see pass thru aqgency who doesnot report federal income taxes.

An "Ahaaaa" moment having pondered for 18 months why would WFHM be a general purpose corporation and pass all transactions thru Wells Fargo Securities LLC 2000-2008? (3) days prior to actual consumer mortgage.

What responsibility do you hold Sr. Exec. Mgmt accountable for?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Friday, October 8, 2010



Posted on 08 October 2010
False Statements


Action Date: October 7, 2010
Location: Palm Beach County, FL

WHY WELLS FARGO MUST BE ORDERED TO STOP ITS FORECLOSURES. While other banks have acknowledged some problems and halted some foreclosures, Wells Fargo has issued self-serving statements and forged ahead. Why should Wells Fargo be ordered to stop its foreclosures? First, Wells Fargo’s foreclosure mill, Americas Servicing Company, and its robo-signers John Herman Kennerty, China Brown, Heather Carrico, Natasha Clark and others signed thousands of documents each month with no knowledge of the truth of the matters set forth for the courts in those documents. The sheer volume of the documents signed by Kennerty should be enough to convince any court that Kennerty had no knowledge of the facts. A court in Brooklyn found a case where Kennerty’s signature was notarized, but actually did not appear on the document. The notary was mindlessly signing a stack of documents.

Which law firms are submitting the Affidavits in Florida for Wells Fargo? Florida Default Law Group and the Law Offices of David Stern, two of the law firms under investigation by the Florida Attorney General.

Second, Wells Fargo used Docx in Alpharetta, Georgia to produce mortgage assignments used in thousands of Wells Fargo foreclosures.   Many different employees signed the name “Linda Green” on these documents. (For three examples of mortgage assignments used by Wells Fargo, click on the “Pleadings” section on the page of the website where this link will take you:  http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/2010/10/08/why-wells-fargo-must-be-ordered-to-stop-its-foreclosures/– no sign-on is necessary.)

Despite the statements of Lender Processing Services to the contrary, Docx “Linda Green” Affidavits – with many versions of the Linda Green signature – continued to appear in Wells Fargo cases well into 2009.
Examples are also in the Pleadings Section.  

The Perry Affidavit was signed July 10, 2008, but notarized January 15, 2009.   The Carrerra Affidavit was signed in January 2008, but notarized in January, 2009. On these few examples, Linda Green is identified as the Vice President of Wells Fargo bank, the Vice President of Sand Canyon Mortgage and the Vice President of American Home Mortgage Servicing. Most are notarized by the same notary, Brittany Snow, who says she has personal knowledge that Linda Green is Vice President of these many entities.  [Lies, lies, lies.  A lie invalidates the mortgage assignment about which it is sworn to be made, and the same is true of any affidavit. The notary's should have their stamps revoked and should be sanctioned.  Homeowners have lost their homes due to these fraudulent practices endorsed by the lenders all across the board. Comment made by publisher of this site, Kelly L. Hansen]

In the first quarter of 2010, Wells Fargo filed 1,117 foreclosure actions in Palm Beach County, Florida, alone. In the second quarter, Wells Fargo filed 920 foreclosures in Palm Beach County. In the third quarter, Wells Fargo filed 847 foreclosures.   In the vast majority of these foreclosures, Wells Fargo is acting as a trustee for a mortgage-backed securitized trust that cannot even prove that it acquired the mortgages without relying on the Linda Green and John Kennerty documents.


[And by the way, I thought securitized mortgages held in a trust were owned by thousands of investors ... no longer the lender, and that the ownership of any one mortgage has been sliced and diced so many times that it would be impossible to prove?  Again, Kelly L. Hansen, spouting off the angry top of her head.] .... I'll ask and report back to you!!

"Let's hope we are all wealthy and retired
by the time this house of cards falters."
--Internal email, Wall Street, 12/15/06

Thursday, October 7, 2010


Grayson Wants Foreclosure Fraud Investigated
as Systemic Risk, Calls for National Moratorium
By: David Dayen Thursday October 7, 2010 12:52 pm

In a letter to the Financial Stability Oversight Council, the board made up of chief regulators of the financial industry, Rep. Alan Grayson has called for a national moratorium on all foreclosures because of the systemic risk of fraudulent practices.

Grayson has essentially taken this up a notch, beyond the documentation problems that were the source of the anguish over the now-vetoed HR3808. He thinks, as I do, that the documentation fraud covers a much larger fraud, rooted in the securitization of mortgages and the improper processes in which that slicing and dicing played out. This has confused the chain of ownership of the titles of the properties, throwing into question not just foreclosures but the mortgage-backed securities behind them, which represents trillions of dollars. So there’s more than enough reason for the FSOC to step in.

Yves Smith, who has done excellent work on this, reacts:

Although the data points we have seen so far could be considered anecdotal, we have evidence that strongly suggests that major RMBS originators, the investment bank packagers, and the bank trustees failed to convey the notes (the borrower IOU, which is critical to having the legal standing to foreclose in 45 states) to the RMBS trusts starting in 2005, perhaps even earlier. And comments from industry insiders suggest this problem is pervasive.

That puts a cloud over the entire US RMBS market, the biggest asset class in the world. This paper was sold as secured; the ability to offset the cost of borrower defaults by seizing and selling his house is critical to the value of the instruments. And if no assets were conveyed to a particular trust by closing, an even uglier possibility exists: under New York law, which was elected by RMBS as governing law for the trust, it would be considered to be “unfunded”, which means it does not exist.

Where do we go from here? Smith reasons that Congress could somehow pass a law to indemnify the banks, but there would be a lot of state and federal statutes bumping up against one another. Or, the government could move to massively refinance or otherwise encourage the modification of all mortgages owned by Fannie and Freddie, effectively all mortgages. That could also be the outcome of settlements from class action or Attorney General lawsuits, where the banks would move to cut their losses. Or, the banks can resist, the attorneys can carp at one another, and the problem doesn’t get resolved.

Grayson sees a way out. He believes that the amount of MBS makes foreclosure fraud a dead-solid systemic risk, which should prompt action from the FSOC. I’ll bet they never expected to have to make such a decision so quickly. Here’s the remedy that Grayson seeks:

I write to encourage the FSOC to appoint an emergency task force on foreclosure fraud as a potential systemic risk. I am also writing to ask the members of the FSOC to use their regulatory authority to impose a foreclosure moratorium on all mortgages originated and securitized between 2005-2008, until this task force is able to understand and mitigate the systemic risk posed by the foreclosure fraud crisis [...]

The liability here for the major banks is potentially enormous, and can lead to a systemic risk. Fortunately, the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation includes a resolution process for these banks. More importantly, these foreclosures are devastating neighborhoods, families, and cities all over the country. Each foreclosure costs tens of thousands of dollars to a municipality, lowers property values, and makes bank failures more likely.

Grayson is being very canny here, and he happens to be absolutely right. This is the next wave of the financial crisis, playing out in slow motion, and either the banks get away with perpetrating fraud on homeowners, or they eat most of the downside. Dodd-Frank’s resolution authority and systemic risk council was supposedly designed to meet such a test. So, meet it.

The letter was addressed to the current members of the FSOC, made up of the Treasury Secretary (who leads it), the heads of the Federal Reserve, CFTC, SEC, FDIC, OCC, FHA and the NCUA. I linked to it, but it’s also available below.

October 7, 2010

Dear Secretary Geithner and members of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC),

The FSOC is tasked with ensuring the financial stability of the United States, which includes identifying and addressing possible systemic risks. There is a well-documented wave of foreclosure fraud sweeping the country that presents such a risk. Bank of America and JP Morgan Chase have both suspended foreclosures in 23 states where that fraud could be uncovered and stopped by the courts. Connecticut has suspended foreclosures.

I write to encourage the FSOC to appoint an emergency task force on foreclosure fraud as a potential systemic risk. I am also writing to ask the members of the FSOC to use their regulatory authority to impose a foreclosure moratorium on all mortgages originated and securitized between 2005-2008, until this task force is able to understand and mitigate the systemic risk posed by the foreclosure fraud crisis.

So far, banks are claiming that the many forged documents uncovered by courts and attorneys represent a simple ‘technical problem’ with foreclosure processes. This is not true. What is happening is fraud to cover up fraud.

The mortgage lending boom saw the proliferation of predatory lending and mortgage fraud, what the FBI called at the time ‘an epidemic of mortgage fraud.’ Much of this was lender-induced.

When lenders – many of whom are now out of business – originally lent money to borrowers, they often did so knowing that the terms of the loans could not possibly be honored. They sought fees, not repayment. These lenders put people in predatory loans, they induced massive amounts of fraud, and Wall Street banks misrepresented these loans to investors when they moved through the securitization chain. They were stealing money from investors, and from homeowners.

Obviously these originators and servicers didn’t keep good records of who owed what to whom because the point was never about getting paid back, it was about moving as much loan volume as possible as quickly and as cheaply as possible. The banks didn’t keep good records, and there is good reason to believe in many if not virtually all cases during this period, failed to transfer the notes, which is the borrower IOUs in accordance with the requirements of their own pooling and servicing agreements. As a result, the notes may be put out of eligibility for the trust under New York law, which governs these securitizations. Potential cures for the note may, according to certain legal experts, be contrary to IRS rules governing REMICs. As a result, loan servicers and trusts simply lack standing to foreclose. The remedy has been foreclosure fraud, including the widespread fabrication of documents.

There are now trillions of dollars of securitizations of these loans in the hands of investors. The trusts holding these loans are in a legal gray area, as the mortgage titles were never officially transferred to the trusts. The result of this is foreclosure fraud on a massive scale, including foreclosures on people without mortgages or who are on time with their payments.

The liability here for the major banks is potentially enormous, and can lead to a systemic risk. Fortunately, the Dodd-Frank financial reform legislation includes a resolution process for these banks. More importantly, these foreclosures are devastating neighborhoods, families, and cities all over the country. Each foreclosure costs tens of thousands of dollars to a municipality, lowers property values, and makes bank failures more likely.

I appreciate your willingness to assess possible systemic risks to the country, and would again encourage you to suspend foreclosures until this problem is understood and its ramifications dealt with.
5 Comments Spotlight
Tags: FinReg, foreclosures, foreclosure fraud, Alan Grayson, mortgage backed securities, moratorium, systemic risk



My name is Barbara Ann Jackson. (I'm not anonymous -can't get that password thing going.) I submitted the foregoing comment --with my website link. I'd like to add the following to what I wrote:

I paid my NON-SUBPRIME mortgage for 7 years prior to marriage. When a foreclosure mill lawyer fraudulently foreclosed via a defunct lender’s identity, the courts castigated me for not cooperating with frauds being perpetrated upon me, as that lawyer used the defunct lender’s identity, and filed Bankruptcy “lift stay” motions and “proof of claim” documents under Wells Fargo’s name.

Years later, using the non-existent lender’s identity, a ‘simulated’ auction (in my absence) took place and an inside bid was made –even with a federal court Affidavit from a “SUCCESSOR” mortgage company. Still, the foreclosure lawyer had the property deed recorded into the name of the non-existent lender. Months later, the newspaper showed Freddie Mac as paying the non-existent lender over 86,000. Then, Wells Fargo filed a false IRS form 1099-A. I didn't know Wells Fargo had gotten in on the act until I received an IRS tax bill.

It's not simply loss of my home that ‘eats my lunch’, it's such things as horrible, horrible YEARS of judicial abuses, privacy invasions, danger for my safety, blackballed from LAW employment, and other reprisals to which I am yet subjected due to APPALLING LAND GRAB racketeering (AKA) foreclosure. It is similar appalling injustices of which I know have happened to other people, merely because they also lawfully sought their rights to DUE PROCESS OF LAW. Simply put, I WANT MY LIFE BACK. *http://www.lawgrace.org/2010/09/30/important-facts-about-foreclosure-and-mortgage-fraud/


Wednesday, October 6, 2010


Millions of Americans are facing foreclosure.
Is this avoidable?
You bet!, and it's been done.

What is money? (and what is it NOT?)
Originally in England, the unit of money was called "one pound sterling". That was because it was literally, sterling silver a weighing one pound. As it was quite difficult to carry several pounds weight of currency round with you, it was arranged that the actual silver could be held in a bank and a promissory note which was essentially, a receipt for the deposit of each pound of silver, was issued. It was much easier to carry these "bank notes" around and to do business with them. If you wanted to, you could always take these notes to a bank and ask for them to be cashed, and what happened then was that the bank would hand you the equivalent weight of sterling silver in exchange for the notes.

Today, the currency in England is still "bank notes" which are certainly easier to carry around, but there is one very important difference. These notes are issued by the private company called "The Bank of England" (which is as good a name for a company as any other name). However, if you were to take one of their bank notes to the premises of that company and ask for it to be cashed, all that they would do is give you another note with the same number of pounds written on it, or alternatively, some other notes with smaller numbers printed on them. This is because, unlike the original bank notes, there is nothing of any physical value backing up the bank notes of today - they are only worth the physical paper on which they are printed.

It actually gets worse than that. What happens most commonly nowadays is that they do not even bother printing those pieces of paper. Now, they just tap some numbers into a computer record, or if they are old-fashioned enough, they write the numbers into a ledger. What do those numbers represent? Nothing at all - they have no actual value, in other words, just as much value as if you typed them into your own computer - quite meaningless. And yet, a bank or other financial institution will merrily "lend" you those numbers in return for years of your work - now isn't that really generous of them?

Actually, this is not at all funny, because if you don't keep paying them money earned by your very real work, then they will attempt to take your house and possessions away from you. This won't happen if you understand that what they lent you was actually valueless.

Take the case of Jerome Daly of Minnesota.

In court, Jerome challenged the right of the bank to foreclose on his home which had been purchased with a loan from the bank. Jerome argued that any mortgage contract required that both parties (that is, himself and the bank), to put up a legitimate form of property for the exchange. In legal language, that is called a legitimate "consideration" put forward by both parties to the contract.

Jerome explained that the "money" was in fact, not the property of the bank as it had been created out of nothing as soon as the loan agreement was signed.   That is, the money does not come out of the bank's existing assets as the bank is simply inventing it and in reality, the bank is putting up nothing of it's own, except for a theoretical liability on paper.  

As the court case progressed, the President of the bank, Mr Morgan, took the stand and admitted that the bank, in combination with the (privately owned commercial company called) "The Federal Reserve Bank", created the entire amount of the loan in credit in it's own books by means of a bookkeeping entry, the money and credit coming into existence when they created it.

Further, Mr Morgan admitted that no United States Law or Statute existed which gave him the right to do this.

A lawful consideration must exist and must be tendered to support the loan agreement.   The jury found that there had been no lawful consideration put forward by the bank and so the court rejected the bank's application for foreclosure and Jerome Daly kept his home


Foreclosure Fraud of the Week
Two “Original” Wet Ink Notes
Submitted in the Same Case 
by the Florida Default Law Group and JPMorgan Chase

Be it a Pleading, a BOGUS Assignment, a Fabricated Note, a Forgery, or an Assistant Attorney General that works for both the AG Office and a Foreclosure Mill at the same time…Here is a new little game I am going to play. Each week I will be taking ten random foreclosure cases out of the Palm Beach County court house and picking out the one that has the most fraudulent document in the file.

Two “Original” Fabricated Notes?

In my last Foreclosure Fraud of the Week we talked about Poor Photo Shop skills.
This week we will expand on that topic.
Hold onto your hats. This one could possibly be a game changer.
Below are TWO “Original” Wet Ink Notes submitted in the same OPEN case by the notorious Florida Default Law Group.
One submitted by Ms. Ashleigh Politano Esq and the other by Tamara M. Walters Esq.
I am very grateful for this find since it corroborates some theories I have had.
I personally believe, that in most cases, the “Original” notes are purely high quality COPIES. The reason I say this is because almost EVERY “Original” note I examine, the blue “wet ink” signature is always the same odd colored blue. You know, the blue that comes off a printer or copy machine. I have yet to find that same elusive blue colored pen in any stationary store.
I think that the Foreclosure Mills and the Default Processing firms have electronic copies of the notes and just print them out however they need them, or they just replace the last page with a fabricated one that is endorsed to the plaintiff.
Not only that, the last page of the note, in many cases, is a different quality paper then the first few pages.
Now I know these are some conspiracy theorist type allegations, so bear with me and see for yourselves below.
Most judges do not want to hear those theories, so lets take it a step further to possibly opening their eyes.
Remember that these are both “Original” Notes filed in the same case, both with “wet ink” signatures, by the Florida Default Law Group, so they should be identical, right?
I took the liberty on taking screen shots of the “Notes” where I thought there might be frauds perpetrated on the court.
Examine the full Certified Copies below to compare…
I labeled them;
NOTE ONE (Submitted by Ashleigh Politano Esq)
NOTE TWO (Submitted by Tamara M. Walters Esq)
I highly doubt that the TRUE note holder had both of these as originals on hand.
Worm your way out of this one FDLG…
There are more to come…


Florida Foreclosure Defense
Law Offices of Carol C. Asbury

UPDATE 04/29/10

UPDATE 04/29/10

Click on Images to Enlarge

Notices of Filing Original “Notes”

1st Page of Notes

1st Page of Notes

Last Page of Notes
Documentary Tax

Last Page of Notes
Borrowers Signature

Last Page of Notes
Endorsement to Plaintiff by Plaintiff

Last Page of Notes
Original Endorsement to VOID

(Submitted by Ashleigh Politano)
Defendant has retained counsel
(Submitted by Tamara M. Walters)

Note Two See 4closurefraud.org for Details 
Defendant has retained counsel

For more Fraudulent Activity see the Links Below

12 Responses to “Foreclosure Fraud of the Week – Two “Original” Wet Ink Notes Submitted in the Same Case by the Florida Default Law Group and JPMorgan Chase”

  1. MSFraud.orgApril 28, 2010 at 12:53 PM
    To support the fact that papers are being created, here is a link to the transcript of the Texas Supreme Court’s MEETING OF THE TASK FORCE ON JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE RULES on November 7, 2007.
    (See document page# 28)
    The following is from a brief filed in the Texas Supreme Court that addresses the transcript with page references:
    The transcript baldly asserts, as is the case here, that the mandated paperwork required to lawfully execute a foreclosure simply does not exist in 90% of the cases, stating:
    [“So finding a document that says, “I am the owner and holder, and I thereby grant to the servicer the right to foreclose in my name” is an impossibility in 90 percent of the cases.”] (transcript page 27, line 16)
    – Foreclosure mill attorney Michael Barrett.
    Note: Mr. Barrett is the same attorney who came after Relator in 1997 with false allegations that Relator was in default and Bank of America was the true owner and holder of Relator’s note. Relator recently discovered that Bank of America was never the owner or holder and therefore could not have sold Relator’s promissory note to EMC as both falsely maintained in their pleadings to all courts, including Respondent appellate court in 2001, and this court in 2002.
    The remedy for when, as Mr. Barrett confirmed “There really isn’t such a document” (Page 27, line 8), was revealed by Judge Bruce Priddy (See State of Texas v. Judge Priddy D-1-GV-08-002311) when he added:
    “They just create one for the most part sometimes, and
    the servicer signs it themselves saying that it’s (sic) been
    transferred to whatever entity they name as applicant”.
    (page 28, line 10)
    First American added:
    “Well, the other problem — Judge, this is Tim Redding. The other problem that I see — and, Tommy, you and I talk about it regularly – that we have a bunch of servicers that are corporations or trusts attempting to foreclose on behalf of other trusts using a power of attorney, and I don’t think that’s really proper. I mean, we all kind of turn a blind eye to it, but I think that’s an issue that’s out there that somebody could use to potentially attack a foreclosure.”
    (page 33, line 5)
    This Texas Supreme Court transcript suggests why many of the participants engaged in mortgage fraud seek refuge in Texas. The transcript also brings credence to Relator’s belief that neither Bank of America nor EMC could have held him hostage to years of litigation unless the court(s) were willing participants in the Ponzi scheme that allowed EMC to continue its proven “illegal” practices, that include, but are in no way limited to, the outright theft of Relator’s home, equity, personal belongings and tendered payments on a debt he now learns didn’t even exist.

  2. The693April 27, 2010 at 8:11 PM
    Are blank mortgage and note forms ever downloaded from a computer and printed out on an office printer(water soluble ink) to be signed by the borrower? It seems to me all the ones I’ve seen were actually printed on a printing press(oil and water process). A drop of water on a COPY will dissolve or run the ink. A printing press copy will require alcohol or something similar to run the ink.

  3. ObamaApril 27, 2010 at 7:23 PM
    Do any of these federal agencies worth what the taxpayers are funding? Are there any new agencies that would do their job and serve the interest of the people. Get rid of McCallum he’s into this knee deep..Fight for your country and get rid of the garbage starting with the criminal judges and politicians that are like cancer to this society…

  4. ForeclosureHamletApril 27, 2010 at 6:25 PM
    I did notify the FBI about this. I was told that if there was any issue with the mortgage being delinquent, then this was a CIVIL matter. Agent Degnan in the FBI’s West Palm Beach, Florida office assured me that the judge in the foreclosure case would review the files and would help sort it all out. He admonished me for being so insistent that this was a criminal matter for investigation by reminding me that the only thing that would matter to the prosecutor would be if the mortgage was current or not.
    “Ma’am, you are not listening to me! This is CIVIL! Ma’am, did you not hear yourself? The mortgage is not being paid.”
    “Sir, do you ALWAYS ask about the personal finances of all crime victims before you are willing to even look at the evidence when a complaint is called in? Do you not understand that there is counterfeit promissory notes being fabricated and used as evidence of proof of a debt that may not exist at all, let alone to the entity that is doing counterfeiting the evidence?”
    “Again, Ma’am, you said that there is a problem in that the mortgage isn’t being paid.”
    And with that………..my last vestige of faith and belief in my country was blown to smithereens.
    As my good friend tells me all the time, “It’s up to us and we are going to get the job done.”

    • Gordon BrooksApril 27, 2010 at 8:20 PM
      Perhaps it’s time to try the local authorities. That’s going to be my next step in my case, where the same mortgage was assigned twice. There is a statute in New Hampshire that makes it a felony to tamper with recordable instruments.

    • Incognito123April 28, 2010 at 1:39 PM
      Well L, you did the right thing, I think I would file a complaint against the agent, as there in fact may be a civil issue, BUT, the filing of two ‘original’ notes IS criminal, plain and simple.

  5. stopGOVTwasteApril 27, 2010 at 4:09 PM
    ASHLEIGH POLITANO… what say you?
    TAMARA WALTERS… what say you?
    MR ECHIEVERRA… what say you?
    AG MCCOLLUM… what say you?

  6. dormanmomApril 27, 2010 at 3:43 PM
    Please tell me this woman did not lose her home, PLEASE!

  1. Florida Attorney General Bill McCollum Launches Investigations into Florida Default Law Group and Docx, LLC a/k/a Lender Processing Services « Foreclosure Fraud – Fighting Foreclosure Fraud by Sharing the KnowledgeTrackback on April 29, 2010 at 9:45 AM
  2. When is an “Original” Note Not THE “Original” Note? | Matt Weidner BlogTrackback on April 27, 2010 at 5:25 PM


If you would like to receive information on how you might avoid the foreclosure of your home, please e-mail me your name, address, and phone number. Someone from our office will be in touch right away to assist you. With Warm Regards, Kelly L. Hansen, HOMEOWNERS HELPING HOMEOWNERS, ctsmyhon@yahoo.com
Be happy, healthy and prosperous, but most of all, be blessed.
Kelly L. Hansen's photo.

Kelly L. Hansen

Jurisdictionary® just click on the link
Make Sure Your Attorney Is Working For You!
Kelly L. Hansen
33605 W. 88th Street
De Soto, KS 66018
913-269-0399 Phone
888-881-2349 Fax