Archive for 'Servicer' Category
Patrick Giunta, Esq. brought this case to my attention. Here is a case between the famed Florida Default Law Group, who reached distinction amidst accusations of fabricated documents, and an ordinary borrower represented by a St. Peterburg trial lawyer, John R. Cappa, who apparently knows the timing and content of the right objections. The result […]
I know it doesn’t make sense. Why would a lender falsify documents in order to make a loan? I had a case in which a major regional bank had their loan representatives falsify loan documents by having the borrower certify that there were houses on his two vacant lots. The bank swore up and down […]
In the search for a magic bullet, many pro se litigants and even attorneys have ended up perplexed by laws and rules regarding an action to Quiet Title (frequently misspelled by pro se litigants as “Quite Title”). The purpose of this article is to add some context to the discussion and some reasons for my […]
The general practice of the servicers and trustees is to disclose a list of as many as 35 possible witnesses so that the Defendant homeowner cannot possibly perform due diligence investigation, deposition etc. The Judges got wise to this and agreed that disclosing 35 witnesses, 34 of whom you do not intend to call, is […]
For the last few weeks I have been harping on the concepts of holder in due course, holder with rights of enforcement, and holder. They are all different. The challenge in court is to get them treated as different in Court as they are in the statutes. The Banks knew through their attorneys that the […]
Courts and lawyers are continually ignoring the obvious. By zeroing in on the NOTE, they are ignoring the documents that allow the person in possession of the note to be in court. That results in elimination of critical elements of a prima facie case in which the Defendant borrower lacks the superior knowledge and resources […]
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only. It is not legal advice. Always consult with a licensed attorney about your specific case. Why Experts Are Needed In foreclosure cases involving securitized loans—or loans subject to claims of securitization—the system is intentionally complex. The terms, methods, and money flows are far beyond the knowledge of […]
“In their quest for a windfall they have given the homeowners a path to justice — one where the notice of default, notice of sale, notice of acceleration notice of right to reinstate and redemption rights are all screwed up (i.e., wrong and invalid). With 80%+ of the losses already paid, the loans could have […]
Many judges in foreclosure actions continue to rule that the securitization documents are irrelevant. This would be a correct ruling in the event that there were no securitization documents. Otherwise, the securitization documents are nothing but relevant. There are three scenarios in which the securitization documents are relevant: The party claiming to be a trustee […]
THEY ARE ADMITTING THEY DIDN’T PAY FOR THE LOAN THIS CORROBORATES THE ALLEGATION THAT THE TRUST WAS UNFUNDED IF THE TRUST WAS UNFUNDED IT COULD NOT HAVE ORIGINATED OR ACQUIRED THE LOAN In situations where the alleged REMIC Trust is the party initiating foreclosure, you will find in most instances that they are alleging that […]


