17 News Investigation: Homeowner challenges bank
A Bakersfield homeowner is taking on a bank, in a battle that could have sweeping implications for people facing foreclosure.
Mark Demucha wants Wells Fargo to prove it owns his home loan. And, if his lawsuit is successful, it could set a legal precedent that slows or even stops foreclosures across the state.
"Filled out the same paperwork over and over again."
Mark Demucha says all he wanted was to keep his house. "Sent it to them over and over again. I couldn't give you the exact time frame, but it's ridiculous," he said.
But, after a year of trying to get a loan modification from Wells Fargo... "I had to do something to protect my family. to protect my home."
He felt all washed up. "Not yes, not no, not anything. They didn't respond."
Demucha turned to family friend Michael Finley who happens to be a lawyer.
"A company that does not have a legal right to collect mortgage payments should not have the right to foreclose," said Finley.
Now, in a case that could have far-reaching implications, Demucha and Finley say they have one simple request. "If they are going to take my house, I should be able to see they have a legal right to take it from me," said Demucha. "They come to me and want me to have every single piece of paper I was ever supposed to have. But, when I say 'hey where is my promissory note?' they look at me like I'm a thief."
Banks, at the time, seemed like they were almost using the housing market as a roulette wheel or a craps table. They were shoving debt around like it was a card game.
Like so many millions of homeowners, Demucha's loan was sold to another lender, a common practice because it's profitable to the banks.
In the old days, any time ownership of a property and its loan changed hands, it would be recorded at the Hall of Records at a cost of $18. For the mortgage industry, that took too long and on a large scale cost too much money. So they privatized it by creating the mortgage electronic registration system, a company headquartered in Reston, Virginia.
The sole purpose of MERS was to cut out the county clerk, allowing one mortgage company to quickly and electronically transfer a loan to another mortgage company.
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman told 17 News, MERS holds title to about 60% of the country's home mortgages or about 32 million loans. MERS is basically an electronic handshake between banks, saying we have a deal.
But, MERS has turned into a headache for some lenders as homeowners across the country have successfully challenged the company's legal standing in court. Others like Demucha are demanding their lender produce loan documents which may have been lost or even destroyed in the MERS shuffle.
"Why should the bank not still be required to possess a single piece of paper that they are the right place to home the consumer should make the payments?"
Earlier this month, a state appellate court agreed, overturning a Kern County judge's ruling that Wells Fargo could foreclose on the home.
The case is headed back to our county where the same judge will have to decide if Wells Fargo can prove it legitimately holds title to the Demucha's home.
"I wish I were David and they were Goliath. This would have been an easier fight. They are like an army of Goliaths and I'm like David with his hands tied behind his back," said Demucha.
Wells Fargo spokesman Tom Goyda couldn't comment on the specifics of this case but acknowledged the appellate court had sent the case back to the Kern County trial court to rule on several issues. Goyda noted the appeals court did not actually rule on the case and that Wells Fargo would continue to try the case in court.
A spokeswoman for MERS said her company said she couldn't comment because they are not part of this lawsuit. Demucha and his attorney are basically asking for Wells Fargo to go away and to restore the couple's credit.
"Wells Fargo essentially ignored them until the fifth district appellate court said Wells Fargo you can't ignore Mark and Sherry Demucha any more," said Finley.
The appellate court ruling has arrived back here in Kern County but a hearing has not yet been scheduled.
Mark Demucha wants Wells Fargo to prove it owns his home loan. And, if his lawsuit is successful, it could set a legal precedent that slows or even stops foreclosures across the state.
"Filled out the same paperwork over and over again."
Mark Demucha says all he wanted was to keep his house. "Sent it to them over and over again. I couldn't give you the exact time frame, but it's ridiculous," he said.
But, after a year of trying to get a loan modification from Wells Fargo... "I had to do something to protect my family. to protect my home."
He felt all washed up. "Not yes, not no, not anything. They didn't respond."
Demucha turned to family friend Michael Finley who happens to be a lawyer.
"A company that does not have a legal right to collect mortgage payments should not have the right to foreclose," said Finley.
Now, in a case that could have far-reaching implications, Demucha and Finley say they have one simple request. "If they are going to take my house, I should be able to see they have a legal right to take it from me," said Demucha. "They come to me and want me to have every single piece of paper I was ever supposed to have. But, when I say 'hey where is my promissory note?' they look at me like I'm a thief."
That's because Wells Fargo didn't loan Demucha the money to buy his house.
Another company called CTX Mortgage, did.
Banks, at the time, seemed like they were almost using the housing market as a roulette wheel or a craps table. They were shoving debt around like it was a card game.
Like so many millions of homeowners, Demucha's loan was sold to another lender, a common practice because it's profitable to the banks.
In the old days, any time ownership of a property and its loan changed hands, it would be recorded at the Hall of Records at a cost of $18. For the mortgage industry, that took too long and on a large scale cost too much money. So they privatized it by creating the mortgage electronic registration system, a company headquartered in Reston, Virginia.
The sole purpose of MERS was to cut out the county clerk, allowing one mortgage company to quickly and electronically transfer a loan to another mortgage company.
On Tuesday, a spokeswoman told 17 News, MERS holds title to about 60% of the country's home mortgages or about 32 million loans. MERS is basically an electronic handshake between banks, saying we have a deal.
But, MERS has turned into a headache for some lenders as homeowners across the country have successfully challenged the company's legal standing in court. Others like Demucha are demanding their lender produce loan documents which may have been lost or even destroyed in the MERS shuffle.
"Why should the bank not still be required to possess a single piece of paper that they are the right place to home the consumer should make the payments?"
Earlier this month, a state appellate court agreed, overturning a Kern County judge's ruling that Wells Fargo could foreclose on the home.
The case is headed back to our county where the same judge will have to decide if Wells Fargo can prove it legitimately holds title to the Demucha's home.
"I wish I were David and they were Goliath. This would have been an easier fight. They are like an army of Goliaths and I'm like David with his hands tied behind his back," said Demucha.
Wells Fargo spokesman Tom Goyda couldn't comment on the specifics of this case but acknowledged the appellate court had sent the case back to the Kern County trial court to rule on several issues. Goyda noted the appeals court did not actually rule on the case and that Wells Fargo would continue to try the case in court.
A spokeswoman for MERS said her company said she couldn't comment because they are not part of this lawsuit. Demucha and his attorney are basically asking for Wells Fargo to go away and to restore the couple's credit.
"Wells Fargo essentially ignored them until the fifth district appellate court said Wells Fargo you can't ignore Mark and Sherry Demucha any more," said Finley.
The appellate court ruling has arrived back here in Kern County but a hearing has not yet been scheduled.
Here are the most recent story comments.View All
The views expressed here do not necessarily represent those of KGET TV 17 - In the Spirit of the Golden Empire
That counsel for Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation and Ocwen Financial Services Inc [having done business through MERS and having lawfully prepared the Notice of Default and having recorded it bearing MERS as beneficiary of the Non-Judicial Foreclosure process] having transacted business unlawfully in violation of Business and Professional Code Section 17910 with a corporation suspended under Corp Code section 2205 and initiating a non-judicial foreclosure proceedings against plaintiff based solely upon the filed notice of Default as filed naming MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM, INC. (MERS) as beneficiary and having foreclosed upon a Deed of Trust recorded as document 2005-0167723 on March 01, 2005 in book XX page XX official records in the office of county recorder of San Diego County California failed to adequately investigate the corporate status of this party its client, and/or has violated California Business and Professions Code 17918 and § 6068(d) and have mislead the court into believing that MERS and its agents were authorized to do business within the state of California when these entities were in violation of California Revenue and Taxation Code section 22301, 22301.5, 23305 and by misleading the court as to MERS DBA
Just found this in my old Zillow profile put there by El Cajon Court Or Judge Exharos or One of the Judges Jan Goldsmith or Ex Chief Justice Ronald George or ordered by The US Attorney [2008] or FBI [2008] It may be of use to some of you Use a jury This Motion to Strike will be made on the grounds that MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM, INC. (MERS) named as beneficiary both within the original recorded deed of trust as put forth above and under the filed Notice of Default [Document 2006-0243629] and stated therein as Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc as Nominee for Ownit Mortgage Solutions Inc as beneficiary of the notice of Default is a suspended corporation pursuant California Corporations Code §2205 and California Revenue and Taxation Code §§ 23301, 23301.5 and thus lacks the capacity to prosecute, defend, or appeal any cause of action in a court of law; that MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC. (MERS) has neither been revived, nor is in substantial compliance with the policy requirements for reinstatement; [that defendants having passed the point of no return within the Non-Judicial Foreclosure proceedings the sale could not benefit from revival of MERS as a corporate entity in that the question currently before the court is was MERS a legal/lawfully licensed corporation or a suspended corporation doing business illegally within California at the time it took these actions against plaintiff. That counsel for Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation and Ocwen Financial Services Inc [having done business through MERS and having lawfully prepared the Notice of Default and having recorded it bearing MERS as beneficiary of the Non-Judicial Foreclosure process] having transacted business unlawfully in violation of Business and Professional Code Section 17910 with a corporation suspended under Corp Code section 2205 and initiating a non-judicial foreclosure proceedings against plaintiff based solely upon the filed notice of Default as filed naming
Case No.: GIE 035214 Department 15 Motion to Strike Entire Pleadings based upon Defendant as an agent of MERS and Ace Securities Failure to be lawfully licensed pursuant to Bus & Prof. Code Sections 17910 and 17910 MERS [Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc] Doing business upon a suspended Fictitious Business name Statement Ace Securities having no filed statement Plaintiff cites CCP sections 435 and 436 specifically section B of 436 as lawful grounds for granting motion. Hearing: Date: May 4, 2007 Time: 09:00AM This Motion to Strike will be made on the grounds that MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEM, INC. (MERS) named as beneficiary both within the original recorded deed of trust as put forth above and under the filed Notice of Default [Document 2006-0243629] and stated therein as Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc as Nominee for Ownit Mortgage Solutions Inc as beneficiary of the notice of Default is a suspended corporation pursuant California Corporations Code §2205 and California Revenue and Taxation Code §§ 23301, 23301.5 and thus lacks the capacity to prosecute, defend, or appeal any cause of action in a court of law; that MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC. (MERS) has neither been revived, nor is in substantial compliance with the policy requirements for reinstatement; [that defendants having passed the point of no return within the Non-Judicial Foreclosure proceedings the sale could not benefit from revival of MERS as a corporate entity in that the question currently before the court is was MERS a legal/lawfully licensed corporation or a suspended corporation doing business illegally within California at the time it took these actions against plaintiff. That counsel for Cal-Western Reconveyance Corporation and Ocwen Financial Services Inc [having done business through MERS and having lawfully prepared the Notice of Default and having recorded it bearing MERS as beneficiary of the Non-Judicial Foreclosure process] having
In numerous court matters Judicial Notice was granted to a letter written by the Delaware Secretary of Banking Robert Glenn This letter was issued in response to a Freedom of Information and GC 6250 Public Records Act request and a small claims case the question as put to both Mr Glenn and the California DFI was as a trust had Ace which at that point held over 38 trillion in mortgage notes HELOCS and other oligations ever qualified under Cal Corp Code 2105 as a foreign entity the Secretary of State Debra Bowen had certified No It had Not The FTB said it had never paid any california taxes the California DFI General Counsel stated it had never registered as a trust The final question to Mr Glenn was that a business registered as a trust in the state of Delaware must first have its articles of incorporation endorsed under Delaware Code thusly This corporation would appear to be in violation of the following laws:No corporation shall begin the transaction of business until a certificate has been granted. (38 Del. Laws, c. 94, § 10; Code 1935, § 2379; 5 Del. C. 1953, § 733; 57 Del. Laws, c. 740, § 19A.) Mr Glenns answer was that its office had no records relating to Ace Securities Corporation [copies of all judicially noticed answers from 27 separate Delaware and California agencies are in El Cajon case file 2007-33928 and two other files] The IRS states that Ace is an illegal business trust a Delaware business trust Abusive Trust Tax Evasion Schemes - Special Types of Trusts Business Trust The term "business trust" is not used in the Internal Revenue Code. The regulations require that trusts operating a trade or business be treated as a corporation, partnership, or sole proprietorship, if the grantor, beneficiary or fiduciary materially participates in the operations or daily management of the business These trusts are a creation of the Delaware and Alaska legislatures and have no impact on taxation of trusts for federal purposes
As bad as MERS and MERSCORP are they pale in comparison to the people who lent the money in the first place In China, the persistence of inflation pressure has brought “shadow banking” into a topic of hot debate recently. Shadow banking in China mainly exists in the form of "Bank and Trust Cooperation", the underground financing networks; but small loan companies and pawn shops also play a role in these shadow financing activities. While mortgage securitization is not an issue in China, the “Bank and Trust Cooperation” is a vehicle to provide 'hidden' loans to enterprises outside the scope of the bank's reserve limit. Similar to the credit securitization problems in the US, the banks play the role as an intermediary. They charge service fees and commissions for services provided, while referring the securitized loans to banks customers, and raising funds off the bank's balance sheet.This entity can be found within the records of Delaware and the SEC as ACE SECURITIES CORP. The undersigned, for the purpose of organizing a corporation under the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, does hereby certify: FIRST: The name of the corporation is ACE Securities Corp. (hereinafter called the “Corporation”).SECOND: The address of the Corporation’s registered office in the State of Delaware is 15 East North Street, Dover, Delaware 19901, in the County of Kent. The name of its registered agent at such address is Vanguard Corporate Services, LTD.THIRD: The purpose for which the Corporation is organized is to engage in only the following activities:(a)to authorize, issue, sell, deliver, purchase and invest in (and enter into agreements in connection with), and/or to engage in the establishment of one or more trusts (each, a “Trust”), In numerous court matters Judicial Notice was granted to a letter written by the Delaware Secretary of Banking Robert Glenn This letter was issued in response to a Freedom of Information and GC 6250 Public Records Act request and a small
CALIFORNIA CODES CIVIL CODE SECTION 2920-2944.7 2924. (a) Every transfer of an interest in property, other than in trust, made only as a security for the performance of another act, is to be deemed a mortgage, CALIFORNIA CODES REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE SECTION 11931-11935 11932. If a county has imposed a tax pursuant to this part, every document subject to tax which is submitted for recordation shall show on the face of the document the amount of tax due 11933. If a county has imposed a tax pursuant to this part, the recorder shall not record any deed, instrument or writing subject to the tax imposed pursuant to this part, unless the tax is paid at the time of recording. MERS can produce no exemption to recording fees therefore it is actionable as aprimary under aiding and abetting tax evasion All MERS documents recorded within EDS violate the following statute and are therefore subject to back assessment 531. If any property belonging on the local roll has escaped assessment, the assessor shall assess the property on discovery at its value on the lien date for the year for which it escaped assessment. It shall be subject to the tax rate in effect in the year of its escape except as provided in Section 2905 of this code. Counties around the U.S. are receiving far less in mortgage-related filing fees since the Reston, Va.-based Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) started tracking real estate transactions in its electronic database. The Washington-based National Association of Counties reports counties in North Carolina and Pennsylvania, in particular, have lost millions in fee revenue since the mid 2000s. Penni Dudley When a mortgage is sold or there is a transfer of mortgage servicing interests, MERS tracks the transaction in its electronic files, but it does not record subsequent mortgage assignments. More importantly, MERS does not pay fees to local county recorders and registrars. "MERS has cut into a key revenue-generating source in eac
Chapter 10 Deeds of Trust and Mortgages Strike Vs Transwest Discount Corp 92 Cal.App.3d 735 Deeds of Trust Section 35 FN 3 [3] A recorded assignment of note and deed of trust vests in the assignee all of the rights, interests of the beneficiary (Musgrave v. Renkin, 180 Cal. 785 [183 P. 145]) including authority to exercise any power of sale given the beneficiary (Civ. Code, § 858). The equitable subrogee to a senior lienholder's right, on the other hand, does not have identical rights, e.g., he cannot compel a written assignment. (Snider v. Basinger, supra, 61 Cal. App. 3d 819, 824.) He cannot foreclose by nonjudicial process as can the assignee of such rights by written instrument. (Code Civ. Proc., § 726.) The power of sale here derived from the instrument itself. (Civ. Code, § 2932; McDonald v. Smoke Creek Live Stock Co., 209 Cal. 231, 235-236 [286 P. 693].) CALIFORNIA CODES CIVIL CODE SECTION 2920-2944.7 2932.5. Where a power to sell real property is given to a mortgagee, or other encumbrancer, in an instrument intended to secure the payment of money, the power is part of the security and vests in any person who by assignment becomes entitled to payment of the money secured by the instrument. The power of sale may be exercised by the assignee if the assignment is duly acknowledged and recorded. We are not exaggerating when we say “We write The Book” on California real estate law. For over 40 years, our attorneys have been writing and updating the most authoritative and comprehensive treatise in the field, Miller & Starr, California Real Estate.Currently in its third edition, “The Book” is the most widely used and cited California real estate law reference for lawyers, judges and real estate professionals. The Book has been cited hundreds of times in reported decisions at all levels of State and federal appellate courts in California. Now expanded to twelve volumes and more than 36 chapters, The Book covers virtually every subject related to real prop
Roger Lowenstein gives Americans permission to do what companies do every day: 1. Ask for a better deal, and/or 2. Walk away. [V]oluntary defaults are a new phenomenon. Time was, Americans would do anything to pay their mortgage — forgo a or a vacation, even put a younger family member to work. But the housing collapse left 10.7 million families owing more than their homes are worth. So some of them are making a calculated decision to hang onto their money and let their homes go. Is this irresponsible? Bsinesses — in particular Wall Street banks — make such calculations routinely. Morgan Stanley recently decided to stop making payments on five San Francisco office buildings. A Morgan Stanley fund purchased the buildings at the height of the boom, and their value has plunged. Nobody has said Morgan Stanley is immoral — perhaps because no one assumed it was moral to begin with Lowenstein makes a good (if not open-and-shut) case: The specified penalty for failing to pay your mortgage is that you have to surrender the house. And you're doing that. By the way, one advantage of this move, aside from underwater homeowners from pouring money down a rat hole, is that it will help fix the housing market faster. If underwater homeowners walk away, the banks willl be forced to take a writedown on the bad loan instead of pretending that it's worth what they say it's worth. This will help the bank clean up its balance sheet faster. So think of walking away as helping to force banks to do what the government refused to make them do--take their losses!
From a CBS 60 Minutes article These people could afford the mortgage payments and are still walking away. The real culprits, the banks, mortgage companies, realtors, assessors, and developers. These group colluded to inflate the values of the houses more than what they were worth. These examples were not of people that could not afford the mortgage, but of people that were convinced by the aforementioned groups that the house was actually worth what they were asked to pay for it. It is the obligation of the lenders and assessors to determine the value of the house accurately. In most cases they were over-valued so the lendor, the assessor, and the builder could make their money and leave the homeowner with negative equity. They are getting what they deserve. This homeowner should not be able to walk away from this obligation... But it is ok for Morgan Stanley to walk away from 9,000,000,000 billion dollars worth of real estate since the meltdown and Revels, a casino they now don't feel is appropriate for a bank to own, along with Crescent Properties NC,Duke Energy and the much larger Cresent Real Estate Equity Properties in Texas, a mix of luxury residential complex called Canyon Ranch! and that's just for starters. 60 Minutes should do some type of follow-up showing the major corporations that have walked away from over priced real estate they bought in addition to all of the violations of Federal and State Law lenders have committed. I am walking away from my home because it is a smart business decision. I will go out and buy a distressed property for CASH... Make sure you buy the new property in a Corporate name and not yours,the advantages are incredible. Morals are for Church - of which there are none in the world of business.
The Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act passed by Congress in 2007 expires in 2012 meaning that the system and lenders will impose taxes upon any debt forgiven after 2012 Cancellation of Debt. This form generally results in a tax liability for the debtor. The Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act passed by Congress in 2007 can, however, provide tax relief in certain circumstances where the written off debt resulted from the mortgage associated with a primary residence. This relief can especially benefit unemployed persons who can afford additional tax liability.President George W. Bush signed the Mortgage Forgiveness Relief Act into law on December 20, 2007. Before the passage of this act, if you modified your mortgage loan and your original mortgage holder forgave a portion of the mortgage debt, you would have assumed tax liability for the forgiven mortgage debt. Your lender would have issued you a Form 1099-C and the IRS would have required you to report the amount on the Form 1099-C as income. However with the passage of the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act, the IRS now allow you, in most cases, to exclude the amount reported on the 1099-C from your taxes when the 1099-C resulted from a mortgage loan modification.According to Brent T. White's book, "Underwater Home: What Should You Do if You Owe More on Your Home than It's Worth," the primary purpose of the Mortgage Forgiveness act was to prevent foreclosures. The act aims to help you stay in your home while repaying the majority of your mortgage debt. According to the IRS, the act applies to reduced debt resulting from a loan modification and written-off mortgage debt resulting from a foreclosure. The applies to debt forgiven in the years 2007 to 2012.The only debts that fall under the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act are debts directly related to building or buying your primary residence. The act also applies do debt assumed to make substantial renovations to improve your primary residence. Further, un
Links We Like
 |
 |
 |
 |
Get Foreclosure Help Now
Foreclosure Defense Lawyer
Free Consult - No Upfront Costs
www.alialawgroup.com
Foreclosure Defense Lawyer
Free Consult - No Upfront Costs
www.alialawgroup.com
Avoid Home Foreclosure
Automated Stop Foreclosure Program
Enter Details-See Right Way-Free!
www.AvoidingMortgageForeclosure.com
Automated Stop Foreclosure Program
Enter Details-See Right Way-Free!
www.AvoidingMortgageForeclosure.com
Sue Your Lender
Mishandled Loan? Predatory Lending?
Get Cash Settlement & Save Home.
HomeOwnerLitigationteam.com
Mishandled Loan? Predatory Lending?
Get Cash Settlement & Save Home.
HomeOwnerLitigationteam.com
Chapter 13 Bankruptcy
$0 Money Down - Ch. 13 Filings!
Set up your free consult today.
www.billsbills.com
$0 Money Down - Ch. 13 Filings!
Set up your free consult today.
www.billsbills.com
Government Mortgage 2.37%
See Government Mortgage Rates Now.
Free Mortgage Quotes. No SSN Reqd.
Government.Mortgage.LeadSteps.com
See Government Mortgage Rates Now.
Free Mortgage Quotes. No SSN Reqd.
Government.Mortgage.LeadSteps.com
No comments:
Post a Comment