A Document labeled "Assignment of Mortgage" Does Not Prove the Sale of the "Loan"

Dec 21, 2016

Too many lawyers and pro se litigants look at the title to a document and don’t know what else to do with it. They accept as true that a document is what is stated. That is one of the many trapdoors the banks have laid for us.

Listen to the Last Neil Garfield Show at http://tobtr.com/s/9673161

Get a consult! 202-838-6345

https://www.vcita.com/v/lendinglies to schedule CONSULT, leave message or make payments.

THIS ARTICLE IS NOT A LEGAL OPINION UPON WHICH YOU CAN RELY IN ANY INDIVIDUAL CASE. HIRE A LAWYER.

—————-

The “title” to a document is a statement of fact that may or may not be true. The title used is for the convenience of the party who drafted it. In our analysis we do not assume or accept that any document is what is stated as the title or anywhere else in the document.

The fact that a document is entitled “Assignment of Mortgage” does not mean that in reality there is either a valid mortgage or that a valid debt, note or mortgage was sold in any transaction.

Nor does the existence of the document mean that the signatures are authentic and authorized or even that the named entities or signatories actually exist as legal “‘persons.'”

The admission of such a document into evidence normally proves only that the document exists. While the existence of the document might raise assumptions or even legal presumptions, the document itself is not proof of any statements of fact or issues referred to in the wording of the document.

Such statements would normally be regarded or should be regarded as hearsay and excluded from evidence unless someone with personal knowledge, under oath, had personal knowledge for their five sense and recalled events that were tied to the execution of the document.

Objections must be timely raised or the objection is waived. Hence, if opposing counsel refers to wording in the document, that wording is hearsay but must be barred by (a) an objection at the moment the wording is the subject of a question to a witness and (b) the court sustaining the objection in the absence of a proper foundation for the admission of what is or ought to be recognized as excluded hearsay evidence.