Do you need an expert witness in foreclosures?

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 an ordinary homeowner, lawyer, or even judge.

At its core, the problem is simple:

• The note and mortgage are often unenforceable, making many foreclosures shams.

• The ownership and balance are unclear, because investors, servicers, insurers, and credit default swap counterparties may all be involved in the same debt.

Without expert testimony, these complexities are either ignored or misunderstood, allowing sham parties to pursue foreclosure despite having no legal claim.

What Judges Often Get Wrong

Many judges ask:

• “What difference does it make whether the loan was securitized?”

• “Why does securitization matter if the borrower stopped paying?”

The answer: securitization—or the claim of it—is the only reason foreclosure mills can even bring a case. Documents like the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (PSA), the Prospectus, and the Assignment and Assumption Agreement are the backbone of the claimant’s authority. If those documents are false, incomplete, or irrelevant, the entire foreclosure case collapses.

Experts explain why securitization matters, why the burden of proof changes, and why the documents produced in court rarely demonstrate real ownership of the debt.

The Missing Loan Contract

A foreclosure case presumes the existence of a valid loan contract. But in many securitized transactions, that contract never actually exists.

• No lender representations: The “originator” named on the note often never loaned the money.

• Undisclosed parties: Funds came from investors or aggregators, not from the named lender.

• Dual tracking: Loans destined for securitization were treated differently than those kept in a bank’s portfolio.

• Hidden profits: Intermediaries received huge fees that were never disclosed, violating the Truth in Lending Act (TILA).

Without a real loan contract supported by offer, acceptance, and consideration, the note and mortgage are legally unenforceable.

Why Intermediaries Push Foreclosure

Foreclosure rarely benefits either the homeowner or the true investor-creditors. Instead, it benefits the intermediaries:

• Servicers seeking to recover servicer advances.

• Investment banks protecting trading profits.

• Master servicers and underwriters hiding undisclosed fees.

Borrowers never agreed to give these intermediaries control, nor were they told about the risks built into securitization. Yet, those intermediaries are the ones driving foreclosure.

Bottom Line

The absence of a real loan contract—and the absence of proof of ownership—should bar foreclosure. But without expert testimony to explain these complex structures, judges often accept fabricated documents at face value.

An expert’s role is to make the invisible visible:

• To show the court what securitization really means.

• To demonstrate how contracts were never formed.

• To explain why foreclosure, in many cases, is legally baseless.

Need Help With Your Case?

Call us today at 844.583.5339
Submit your case statement online for a complimentary recommendation.
Visit LivingLies.me for resources and case insights.

Posted in Corruption, evidence, expert witness, foreclosure defenses, Modification, Pleading, securities fraud, Servicer |