ADMIT NOTHING!

Despite the fact that we already know in the public domain that the facts of this case probably provide ample support for allegations of fraud and defenses to any attempt to foreclose by a stranger, this case, like many others I have been lately reviewing shows directly what happens when you make a material admission to the status of any of the parties.

Get a LendingLies Consult and a LendingLies Chain of Title Analysis! 202-838-6345 or info@lendinglies.com.

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

OR fill out our registration form FREE and we will contact you!

https://fs20.formsite.com/ngarfield/form271773666/index.html?1502204714426

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

—————-

see Third Circuit and owner of the mortgage and note

The moment you admit to any of the allegations in the narrative of the named foreclosing party, even if they are a complete stranger to the transaction (the loan of money), the execution of the loan documents (note and mortgage or deed of trust), the “transfers,” the current party claiming document possession, delivery, rights to enforce or “ownership,” you have autoasphixiated.

“Everybody knows” is not a legal doctrine. In this case the homeowner admitted the status of the servicer because somebody thought it was obvious and somebody thought that taking a contrary position would make him/her appear silly. Thus what was and remains false became true for purposes of the case.

What is silly is admitting things you know nothing about and haven’t bothered to research or investigate. That is as plainly wrong as the underwriting of loans on declared income of $126,000 for a dog walker unless you are Cesar Millan.

What is silly is admitting to the status and rights of any of the parties in the false chain presented and then challenging the status you admitted.

So you get decisions like this and people all up in arms about how unfair it is. The courts are not your lawyer. If you admit something asserted by your opponent it becomes a fact and it becomes the ONLY evidence of that fact on record. The appeals court has no authority to say that the trial court was wrong by accepting the admission because if it did any research it could have at least raised a question about the standing of the party foreclosing. The law doesn’t work that way.

The moral of every litigation story is admit nothing unless you actually know it is a fact and you are not relying upon the representations of your opponent. The fact that you have been paying an entity doesn’t mean that was the right thing to do. The fact that you reasonably believed that to be true can be admitted. But do not admit that they are who they say they are. The whole point of a case based in fraud, for example, is that you acted based upon false representations of the defendant; that the representations were material and false; that the representations were known by the culprit to be false; that the representations were made for the purpose of harming you and benefiting the party making the representations; and that you reasonably relied on those represetnations to your detriment.

Now in view of all that, how can you say that YOU know that the party representing itself to servicer, trustee or debt collector is who they say they are? The entire bank scheme is based entirely on assymetry of knowledge. They know exactly what they did and you don’t. They have access to the information that specifically details the fraudulent scheme and you don’t. But you can still attack standing and make other claims or defenses by showing inconsistencies that demonstrate their claims are false.

Posted in Uncategorized |