REMIC Trusts Do NOT Exist

THE ESSENCE OF A TRUST IS NOT THE TRUST DOCUMENT. THE ESSENCE IS THE EXISTENCE OF TRUST PROPERTY.

Like legal standing, there must be some THING that is involved or the court has no jurisdiction. If you look up any source on the definition or elements of a legal trust, there is no “Trust” if no THING (property) has been conveyed to the intended Trustee to hold in “Trust.” Without a THING, property in the Trust instrument is both nonexistent and irrelevant and does not create a legal “person” in any court in any state. Trusts of all types do not exist unless and until property is entrusted to the Trustee.

We now know both directly and indirectly that the REMIC Trusts never received the proceeds of sale of certificates allegedly issued by the “Trust.” So nothing was transferred to the Trustee to hold in Trust. We also now know that no purchase or transfer of assets or loans ever occurred thereafter. Hence the disclaimers in the Trust Instrument reducing the Trustee’s obligations to zero. With no property entrusted to the named Trustee, the most basic element of the formation of a trust is missing. The legal “person” does not exist.

Hence one of the primary attacks by homeowners should be that the Trust does not exist and therefore could not be the beneficiary under a deed of trust nor the mortgagee by succession or otherwise.

If anything, even if the “transfer” of loan documents were to be taken seriously, that would place the REMIC Trust in the position of being the Trustee or agent for whoever does own the property! The property in this case being a loan receivable. The paper alone is just that —- paper. Such documents of “transfer” are based upon the supposition that something in the real world of commerce has occurred — otherwise there is no legal reason for the paper to exist except for some criminal or nefarious purpose.

Upon the slightest investigation and research it is readily apparent that no such transactions ever took place in the real world. The REMIC Trusts were never used for anything except as a sham Plaintiff in foreclosure lawsuits or sham beneficiary in substitutions of trustee on deeds of trust, notices of default and notices of sale in nonjudicial proceedings.

So unless a judge wants to put a value on the used copy paper on which the instruments of transfer were fabricated or forged, there is no value and nothing is in trust leaving the beneficiaries with nothing in writing that has any value. All they have is the promise of income and the promise of a beneficial interest in a mortgage loan schedule that did not exist when the certificates were issued and sold, nor did the MLS exist as trust property anytime thereafter.

The attack should be direct in nonjudicial states and by motion in judicial states. A motion to quash service and/or for dismissal is entirely appropriate and even if you don’t believe you will get traction in the trial court, take care to preserve the issue on appeal.

While many “forensic” reports point out inconsistencies, it seems that only the LendingLies analytic report actually provides the argument for lack of jurisdiction based upon the nonexistence of the foreclosing party.

Try to force a hearing in which the lawyers for the foreclosing party are required to show a transaction in which money or property was ever transferred to the alleged REMIC Trust. Even a motion to dismiss might flush them out.

In the end they will be forced to concede that if their assertions in court were true, the Trust would be a holder in due course, enabling them to foreclose free from any borrower defenses. That they never allege HDC status in any litigation is a tacit admission that the Trust was not a party, did not pay value in good faith and without knowledge of the borrower’s defenses.

If they dance around the reasons why they did not allege HDC status you can pursue them in discovery as to the elements of HDC status and the elements of “holder with rights to enforce” status. Either way they collapse when pursued vigorously.

Posted in Uncategorized |