Category: Investor

The irrefutable logic at the foundation of all successful foreclosure defense narratives

February 2, 2023

The mortgage lien is designed to protect against financial loss — not to promote financial gain. If Wall Street wants to protect the financial gains it created from its crazy scheme using weapons of mass financial destruction, then the least it should do is share a little of that with homeowners, consumers, the government, and investors. * I continually get the same question, mostly because neither the homeowner nor the “investigators” understand anything about being a licensed, educated, experienced investment banker, lawyer, or accountant. If they were any of those, they would not ask the question. * The latest question

Notices To and From Servicer Might Mean Nothing at All

April 18, 2022

In homeowner finance, ALL claims start with notices from third parties with whom the homeowner has previously had no communication. My suggestion is that homeowners start challenging those letters, statements, and notices as soon as they arrive. Such challenges make “tracks in the sand” for later use in litigation. But the real issue arises repeatedly because the condition precedent to foreclosure about which there is no dispute is that first there must be a declaration of default. And in the world of securitization, there is no creditor, loan account, or any loss or ven risk of loss arising from a

Use of QWR and DVL is extremely important in counteracting the tracks laid down by securitization that fake a contractual relationship with the homeowner

January 31, 2022

If you are not willing to challenge the basic assumptions of the loan or debt, then you probably should not even start any challenge or defense. If you are willing to do that you will probably win or force the “dark side” into a settlement that you find favorable to your interests. You don’t need to understand how the debt vanished. You only need to know that if you challenge its existence and therefore its owner and agents, the dark side will fail. The inability of consumers to understand the securitization process is not a legal excuse for preying on

WELCOME TO LIVINGLIES — Since 2007

January 28, 2022

KEEP YOUR HOME!!! – Over 17,000,000 Visitors Most of the claims that use “securitization” as a foundation are FALSE!! That means they have no right to administer, collect or enforce any debt, note, mortgage or deed of trust. And THAT means you can successfully challenge foreclosures AND pursue damages against those who make false claims. SUBMIT FREE REGISTRATION STATEMENT WITHOUT OBLIGATION ************************** Listen to The Neil Garfield Show or prior episodes ******************************* About Living lies Contact Information: Phone: 844.478.6774 Email: lance@livinglies.me PRO BONO SERVICES include online chats, comments, and suggestions on the registration form, The Neil Garfield Show, PAID

Getting a piece of the pie: How securitization can work FOR homeowners and not against them

January 19, 2022

There is no sale of the obligation, note or mortgage and so there is no securitization of debt. By splitting the attributes of behavior from the provisions of the executed documents and changing the description of the behavior, an investment bank could, in essence, sell the apparent debt an unlimited number of times without ever recording the sale of the debt, note or mortgage. In most instances, the “closing” of a transaction with a homeowner results in the issuance of a note and mortgage promising payment that is not supported by any reciprocal consideration. In most of the other cases, the “closing” results in very

Magna Bank, N.A. as Trustee for registered holders of certificates issued under the name of the Macandcheese Acquisition Trust, Inc. an inactive corporation, for a nonexistent trust, series 2022-XL-1

December 6, 2021

So a friend of mine left her phone in my car. Here is what I wrote to her: Thank you for leaving your phone in my possession, which as you know is 9/10s of the law. That means that even though you paid for it and you received ownership from the seller, I can now claim it as my property. So by possessing the phone I was able to issue and sell several certificates based upon the possible rental income I would receive from you for access to the phone you already own. * I told the buyers you had scheduled payments

How Could This Not Be a Loan?

December 3, 2021

if the investment bank paid the homeowner as an incentive payment rather than as a loan, then there is no debt any more than salary or wages can later be called a loan. The fact that the consumer/homeowner thought or even wished it were otherwise makes no diffeerence. If I pay you money and you think it is a loan but I paid you for services you rendered, the substance of the transction is “fee for services” — not a loan — and there is no legal or ethical or moral obligation to pay it back. I think the one

Tonight! Neil Garfield makes it simple: Lying for Dollars: How to Apply Your Understanding of Securitization Claims to Win

April 8, 2021

Thursdays LIVE! Click into the Neil Garfield Show Tonight’s Show Hosted by Neil Garfield, Esq. Call in at (347) 850-1260, 6pm Eastern Thursdays “Your Honor, this is a standard foreclosure.” That is the first lie told in court as lawyers, and companies claiming to be servicers, lenders, or trustees continue to play their game of lying for dollars. It’s obvious I have not simplified the explanation enough because both lawyers and homeowners still mostly don’t understand what I am talking about. That means they can’t use it effectively, as I have, and that means the judge won’t have any idea what you

Attack the "Successors"

April 6, 2021

In analyzing the paperwork in front of you, make sure you read every word and do not accept anything said at face value. A popular ruse by foreclosure mills is the use of the word “successor.” I have been saying that this word is used as a cover-up for “we don’t have title to the debt, note or mortgage.” That means they have no loss connected with a claimed scheduled payment that was not received by a “Servicer” who had no right to receive it in the first place. Hat tip to Gary Dubin, Esq. and Shelley Erickson. If they

TONIGHT! Why Lawyers Should Want Foreclosure Defense Cases and What They Are Missing $$$

January 21, 2021

Thursdays LIVE! Click into the Neil Garfield Show Tonight’s Show Hosted by Neil Garfield, Esq. Call in at (347) 850-1260, 6 pm Eastern Thursdays SHARE THIS POST WITH LAWYERS YOU KNOW!!! This show is devoted to convincing the lawyers who will listen that they are missing out on something very profitable and important. Representing homeowners faced with foreclosure papers can and does present an opportunity for large paydays, consistent victories in court, and playing a part in changing the trajectory of home finance in this country and around the world. In 2008 I presented a seminar that provided the essentials of

What Happened With Your "Loan" — By admitting that you received a loan you lose.

December 16, 2020

The plain truth is that homeowners are losing their cases through assymetry of information. They think they understand when they do not have a clue. They are admitting the obvious, which turns out to wholly untrue. In so doing they give the court no choice but to enter judgment aganst them. ApplicationForLoanProcessAndFundingOfServiceFees I am experimenting with new ways to present this. If you click on the above chart you will see that the application process is actually a dead end. Nobody actually agrees to lend any money. Nobody does lend money. Money arrives later at the “closing” table but unknown

Repurchase agreements only advance the myth that loans were purchased in the first place.

December 14, 2020

Investors would do much better if they stopped litigating the duty to enforce repurchase agreements. The repurchase agreement is void because there was no purchase. There are better claims to make that are more easily proven. Homeowner litigants need to have more courage and attack the existence and ownership of the underlying alleged obligation much more explicitly and directly. They will be pleasantly surprised. While they will never get an admission that the whole affair is a scam, they will be able to raise the inference and thus limit the evidence in court that would ordinarily be allowed to prove

Think You Have a Loan? Think Again! Don't allow the Wall Street "investment banks" to steal back money that was earned by homeowners.

December 11, 2020

What is obvious is false but only investment bankers know it. * Without knowing it, you are probably doing business with a Wall Street securities brokerage firm calling itself an “investment bank.” You didn’t know because they were never disclosed. And the money they paid to you was not a loan — at least not for them it wasn’t. They didn’t treat it that way on their own records and neither should you. That means they are attempting to collect back the money they paid to you even though it wasn’t a loan. * So what did they pay you

Sometimes the client figures it out better than the lawyer

December 7, 2020

The problem has always been how to present this counterintuitive reality to a judge who is convinced that securitization of a loan DID occur even though the transaction was not in fact a loan and no sale occurred. After decades of litigating and teaching litigation, the one common theme throughout my career has been the knowledge that often your best ideas come from the client, who is unencumbered by thoughts of what can’t be done. One such client of mine in the state of Hawaii asked a simple question. She asked whether the homeowner, post-foreclosure, could ask for surplus funds.

How and Why to Litigate Foreclosure and Eviction Defenses

December 2, 2020

[contact-form][contact-field label=”Name” type=”name” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Email” type=”email” required=”true” /][contact-field label=”Website” type=”url” /][contact-field label=”Message” type=”textarea” /][/contact-form] Wall Street Transactions with Homeowners Are Not Loans * I think the biggest problem for people understanding the strategies that I have set forth on this blog is that they don’t understand the underlying principles. It simply is incomprehensible to most people how they could get a “loan” and then not owe it. It is even more incomprehensible that there could be no creditor that could enforce any alleged obligation of the homeowner. After all, the homeowner signed a note which by itself creates an

OK Let's Try It Anyway — Amicus Briefs

November 16, 2020

We now have an opportunity to attack the most absurd of the decisions on 2 grounds, to wit: The first is that the decisions are wrong based upon existing judicial doctrine, statutory law, and court precedent. The second is that the decisions are wrong because the justification for bending the law is also wrong. Please Donate to Support Neil Garfield’s Efforts to stop Foreclosure Fraud. I know what I said and I meant it. But I have come under a lot of pressure particularly from one person in Hawaii whose financial contributions have been a substantial factor in keeping

Document Review for Dummies: Why homeowners and their lawyers get confused by documents proffered by foreclosure mills

November 10, 2020

It occurs to me that most questions I receive contain either an inquiry about the meaning of documents or statements as if they know the meaning of documents. So here is a short primer on reviewing documents that might help. WHAT (IF ANYTHING) IS THE TITLE OF THE DOCUMENT? While this seems to be simply a matter of reading and common sense, there is more to it than that. If I draw a rough picture of a dollar bill and hand it to you, nobody will accept it as payment for anything even if the writing on it says “United

Trusts, Trustors, Settlors and Fake REMIC Trusts

October 28, 2020

All trusts that are legally recognized as such have the following basic components: the trustor/settlor who (a) executes a written trust agreement and (b) conveys property into the name of the named trustee to hold and manage the conveyed asset(s) for the benefit of named beneficiaries. So the three basic components are (1) property (the res), (2) a trustor/settlor, and (3) beneficiaries. Pooling and servicing agreements when read closely reveal in all cases that they are missing all three components. * Trustees only exist in relation to a defined trust. A trust may technically exist if it is written down

More Details on VendorScape, CoreLogic and Black Knight

October 13, 2020

Hat tip to “Summer chione” So it is apparent that the banks are responding to discoveries about how orders are transmitted to lawyers, “servicers”, realtors etc.. While it is all the same playbook, they merely change the name of the characters. So internally the name VendorScape might still be used but externally, to the public, they are showing different names and even showing multiple names for the same “service”. But is always the same, to wit: a central repository of data that has been robotically entered to support misrepresentations of investment banks that massage the data, control the reports, and

Processing Fees are more than illegal — by adding them to balance due, the default letter is defective.

September 2, 2020

This is simple logic. If illegal processing fees were greedily added to the “loan accounts” falsely asserted to exist, then the amount demanded from “borrowers” was incorrect. That would make the statements sent to borrowers part of a fraudulent scheme through US Mails which would be mail fraud. And it would make the notices of delinquency and notice of default and notices of default defective and perhaps fatally defective because they were seeking to enforce an amount not due. And it would make foreclosure judgments and sales based upon such demands potentially voidable. see https://spotonflorida.com/southeast-florida/1835819/ocwen-phh-corp-pay-125-million-settlement.html CLICK HERE ORDER ADMINISTRATIVE STRATEGY,

How to ask the right questions in discovery

August 12, 2020

Discovery is part law, part art, and part intuition. The lawyer must generate questions that can be used, by themselves, to bring certain issues in front of the judge either because the opponent answered the questions or because they didn’t answer. If your point is that your opponent doesn’t own the claim even though they either said or implied that they do own it, then you need to do some investigation first so you can ask the right questions in the right way. If your point is that there are two agreements, one for loan and the other for securitization,

Gary Dubin, Esq. Scores Another Victory for Homeowners in Hawaii in Notorious LSF9 Case

August 4, 2020

More kudos to Gary Dubin who keeps producing favorable decisions for homeowners. This ruling is important for a variety of reasons. This time it is all about the rules of evidence and legals tanding to even bring the claim. see US Bank LSF9 v Verhagen 7-20-20 * The first reason is that it presents a court of appeal that drilled down on the actual facts rather than the presumed facts. This is a substantial departure from prior judicial practice. I think it reflects a change in judicial attitude. While nobody is willing to say that these foreclosures are entirely fraudulent, The suspicions and

ALERT! Migrating from fake notes to eNotes: If consumers don't stop this they will be without any defense to any abusive practice and any fake account started in their name

July 31, 2020

The banks have been securitizing data not debt. Now they are trying to make data the substitute for the real thing. In other words, screw the investors, screw the consumers, screw the government and the banks take everything. It’s not securitization that is evil. It is a handful of bankers who are lying to us about securitization. There is a factual and legal difference between securitization of loans and securitization of information about loans. The acceptance of eNOTES or any digitized version of important legal documents is an invitation to disaster. This will make 2008 nostalgic for us. We are

Just like I said: Megabanks are doing just fine despite economic downturn — at the expense of investors, taxpayers and homeowners.

July 21, 2020

Major banks, including Citigroup, JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley used massive trading revenues to beat profit expectations despite the continued struggles of the United States economy during the coronavirus pandemic. Those trading units tend to perform best when markets are volatile, helping to guard the major banks against economic struggles. see https://www.cnbc.com/2020/07/17/without-big-wall-street-trading-arms-regional-banks-lean-on-mortgages-and-fees-to-beat-earnings.html Way back in 2006 and 2007 and when I first started publishing articles about the mortgage meltdown (before most people realized there was a meltdown) I reported that the major banks were siphoning off much of the wealth contained inside the U.S. I said that these mega banks were parking ill-gotten gains off-shore in various