Where has all the money gone?

THE BANKS ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THE BENEFIT OF ANY PRESUMPTIONS AFTER DEMONSTRATING CLEARLY THAT THEY HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY VIOLATING EXISTING LAWS AND MANIPULATING THE LAWS OF EVIDENCE TO ACHIEVE AN UNJUST RESULT. LAWYERS FOR HOMEOWNERS SHOULD FORCEFULLY ARGUE THAT THE PRESUMPTIONS RAISED IN THE UCC AND OTHER STATUTES DO NOT APPLY TO THE BANKS BECAUSE THEY HAVE AMPLY DEMONSTRATED THAT THEY LACK CREDIBILITY, RELIABILITY AND AUTHENTICITY AS A PATTERN AND PRACTICE. INSTEAD OF PROVING THEIR FORECLOSURE CASES WITH PRESUMPTIONS THEY SHOULD BE FORCED TO PROVE THEIR CASE WITH FACTS.

===========================

WE HAVE REVAMPED OUR SERVICE OFFERINGS TO MEET THE REQUESTS OF LAWYERS AND HOMEOWNERS. This is not an offer for legal representation.

Our services consist mainly of the following:

1. 30 minute Consult — expert for lay people, legal for attorneys

2. 60 minute Consult — expert for lay people, legal for attorneys

3. Case review and analysis

4. Rescission review and drafting of documents for notice and recording

5. COMBO Title and Securitization Review

6. Expert witness declarations and testimony

7. Consultant to attorneys representing homeowners

8. Books and Manuals authored by Neil Garfield are also available, plus video seminars on DVD.

For further information please call 954-495-9867 or 520-405-1688. You also may fill out our Registration form which, upon submission, will automatically be sent to us. That form can be found at https://fs20.formsite.com/ngarfield/form271773666/index.html?1452614114632. By filling out this form you will be allowing us to see your current status. If you call or email us at neilfgarfield@hotmail.com your question or request for service can then be answered more easily.

================================

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

—————-

We keep hearing about “settlements.” Yet any review of the settlement announcements and settlement agreements shows that nothing was settled. So Goldman Sachs pays $5 Billion to someone, somewhere, certainly not providing any tangible relief to victims of fraud, forgery, filing or recording false documents and the list goes on. Both investors and homeowners were screwed by Goldman Sachs and the other major banks.

 *

But the real question is this: given the fact that there were administrative and law enforcement findings that the banks engaged in illegal behavior, and given the fact that this resulted in wrongful foreclosures, where is the announcement that such foreclosures should at least be reviewed, coupled with an enforcement mechanism?

 *

The settlements usually have some “review” provision that is in actuality “self-enforced” by the bank. Letters to the State attorney general and CFPB result in virtually no independent investigation. They act more like neutral credit reporting agencies — i.e., a conduit for trading challenges.

 *

The first thing that should be universally accepted is that these settlements were of course a drop in the bucket as it relates to a much larger scheme with far greater damages caused to the financial system, investors and borrowers. That means that fraudulent documents were used in what appears to be the vast majority of all foreclosures. That fact alone should be sufficient for an administrative finding clearly stated that the banks are not entitled to any presumptions based upon apparently facially valid documents.

 *

WHY DO WE KEEP SEEING DECISIONS BASED UPON “LACK OF STANDING”? WHY DOES THE BANK SIMPLY WALK AWAY FROM ACTIONS WHERE THEIR FORECLOSURES ARE DISMISSED AND VACATED? WHY DO THE BANKS ABANDON PROPERTY THAT THEY FORECLOSED UPON?

 *

Think about it. Lack of standing means the banks are not injured parties, the servicers are not really servicers because their contract is with an empty trust, and the trustee of a REMIC Trust is nothing, which is why the banks that act as trustees don’t administer the REMIC Trusts from their trust departments. The whole thing is a sham.

 *

 *

Why has the DOJ failed to step in and force a remedy that protects the investors, who ARE the source of the actual money used in mortgage deals and homeowners who did take SOME of the money that investors gave to underwriters and brokers on Wall Street?

*

Why is anyone allowing (even presuming) that these entities have any right to be in the mix at all? The remedy is simple — as to existing mortgages that were void, that were rescinded, and that were predatory per se or in foreclosure — eliminate the existing servicers, eliminate the existing trustees of REMIC Trustees, eliminate the successor Trustees on Deeds of Trust — because none of them have any real relationship to the loans. THEN create or use some existing government agency to serve as a clearinghouse for modification of mortgage loans with real notes and real mortgages.

 *

There are a bunch of reasons why no real remedy has been pursued. But one of them is that doing as I suggest would cause universal recognition that the notes and mortgages were void from the start and, that borrowers were induced to sign documents that were in furtherance of an illegal scheme contrary to the rights of investors. Yes it would cause the breakup of many banks and yes it would cause the disclosure of how many stable managed funds are under water.

 *

It was wrong to throw the entire burden of losses onto homeowners many of whom were hounded by salespeople to sign up for a loan that made no sense. It is right to bring the real parties to the table and share the risk. But the truth that will come out is that only SOME of the money advanced to underwriters and brokers of “mortgage-backed” securities was used for loans.

*

The banks skimmed, or perhaps the better word is engorged themselves using fictional trades at their trading desk. As a result, 8 years after the crash, nobody wants to really say how bad this crisis is, out of a dark fear that if they tell the truth, the entire financial system will collapse and society will cease to exist as we know it. Meanwhile the only entities that did well in the crash are the same ones who caused it.

 *

Here is the problem with that hypothesis: even it was true, we would be abandoning the US Constitution and our laws installing the banks as the leaders with their hands being the levers of power without any checks and balances. But even more, the widespread myth of calamity in the “Too Big To Fail” hypothesis is plain wrong. We are somewhat unique in the world. Instead of having just a handful of banks with no safety net (except the government) there are more than 7,000 community banks, savings banks, regional banks and credit unions who are already attached to the exact same electronic backbone for electronic transfer of funds.

 *

All of the major banks that collapse when their true balance sheet is revealed could be resolved in an orderly passage to the other banks in the country with ease. The initial psychological shock would give way to a collective sigh of relief as we discovered that the TBTF hypothesis was just plain wrong. That would liberate courts to stop walking on egg shells when they know full well that there is something wrong with the millions of foreclosures based upon entirely false claims.

============================