Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: DoctorZIn
This is a great blog on California by a good friend of mine. He is a new freeper here on FR. His FR name is SurvivingCalifornia. Check out his blog and say hi!

I did check out your friends blog and I have to point out that in most states a copy of a note is sufficient under a "best evidence" rule if the party has made diligent effort to locate the original.

Not that it matters. Many of these banks don't even have copies for thousands of these loans.

Of course the banks could have avoided all this by paying the courthouse fees to have this all recorded legal beagle, but they wanted to save a few bucks and now they're getting burned. Too bad, so sad.

The recording process is an ancient method used to gird our land title and civil procedure systems for centuries. It isn't some new fangled "technicality" as I've seen some Freepers describing this debacle.

Cut corners and try to bypass our system that dates before the colonies whether for fraud or frugality and pay the consequences.

20 posted on 12/03/2010 11:32:12 PM PST by triumphant values (Never criticize that to your right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: triumphant values

I was taught that in law that you have to have two things to have standing in court: 1) ownership and 2) injury.

The banks ripped in two the the trust deeds. They kept the ownership while giving the finacial risk away. I am not a lawyer but I don’t know how the bank can go to court. They own the note but don’t have any injury because they have already sold the financial interest.

How is the bank hurt? And how does the holder of the note show ‘ownership’?


43 posted on 12/04/2010 4:35:12 AM PST by survivingcalifornia (ultra-newbie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

To: triumphant values

I was taught that in law that you have to have two things to have standing in court: 1) ownership and 2) injury.

The banks ripped in two the the trust deeds. They kept the ownership while giving the finacial risk away. I am not a lawyer but I don’t know how the bank can go to court. They own the note but don’t have any injury because they have already sold the financial interest.

How is the bank hurt? And how does the holder of the note show ‘ownership’?


44 posted on 12/04/2010 4:35:15 AM PST by survivingcalifornia (ultra-newbie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson