Oh Yeah? Here is what you say when they are dismissive of your claims

Notwithstanding your assertions to the contrary, the letter is very specific to the subject mortgage transaction. You are quite right however, that we are questioning virtually every aspect of the transaction because there appears to be questionable behavior on the part of multiple parties in connection with every phase of the loan transaction and subsequent sale to investors of some pool of assets into which you placed our client’s name, identity, and reference to a private transaction between the original “lender” (who did not fund the table-funded loan) and our client who unknowingly executed documents that appear to be part of a scheme to issue unregulated securities under false pretenses.

Simply stated, our client has a right to know the identity and contact information of the real lender or holder in due course, if there is one. Our client has every right to know what happened to these documents and what additional promises or conditions were placed upon the expected stream of revenue or payoff of the loan balance. In order to make an informed decision as to whether your company or any other company has the right to collect, enforce or otherwise administrate or communicate with anyone regarding the subject loan transaction.

On that account we herewith demand that you provide us with written instruments documenting your authority to perform any act in connection with the subject loan. An authorization from our client is enclosed (again) showing that we are authorized to converse with you or anyone else regarding the audit, the QWR and the questions raised in this and other correspondence.

If additional obligors or conditions were added to the transaction after or contemporaneous with the loan transaction neither the parties nor the fees were disclosed to our client. In addition, if such was the case, then the unconditional promise to pay contained in the note was modified by subsequent events raising the very “questions” you seek to avoid — specifically whether the instruments that were “negotiated” were negotiable and whether you have knowledge of whether the “actual lender” or holder in due course was paid in whole or in part.

However dismissive you wish to appear of our claims, the SEC filings of the parties involved in this transaction are readily available online. We are not guessing at the facts. We are questioning your role in this scheme.

We again demand your cooperation. Failure to do so will result in litigation. If you do not wish to be a named defendant in said litigation, then you will need to show us that you had nothing to do with the origination of the loan and that you had nothing to do with the handling of the documents from the loan transaction, the pooling and services agreement, the assignment and assumption agreement, or any purchase of insurance products during the securitization process.

Tags: foreclosure defense, foreclosure offense
Posted in bubble |