Thank you for the link to the PDF file. I read it and found it to be very good.
I have a question though, my memory is probably faulty but I seem to recall a Mortgage Foreclosure case where it was shown that the bank had already been paid for the note when they had sold it as part of a securitization package. Therefore the bank had been made ‘whole’ by the sale of the note and because the Mortgage was not a part of the securitization package and the mortgagee was still making payments to the mortgage holder aka ‘the bank’. Since the bank did not hold the note and was receiving payments it was determined that it was receiving the funds under false pretense since it had already been made whole.
The bank rebutted saying that they were merely the agent handling the payments and were forwarding those payments minus a handling fee to the owner of the securitization package. As I recall though the money was being placed into a ‘holding account’ and was never sent on.
In any case I seem to recall that that it was determined that the bank had been made whole and the note therefore no longer existed and the mortgage was an orphan having no note tied to it and that the Mortgagee was required to be relieved of the note and mortgage on the property. Do you recall this sort of thing occuring too?
It is my belief, that in much the same way Federal Reserve Notes can be printed out of thin air, so can "debt".
Fraud is fraud.
Illegal is illegal.
That is not a partisan issue in my eyes, no matter how these bananas try to create a ridiculous spin zone over links.
Being on the side of fraud and illegality is a losing ticket.
Clinging to a "moral" contract (however illegal it may be) whether it be based on ignorance, sheer stupidity, or some sort of agenda, is just plain dumb.
Notice how the rebuttals in this little post are utterly devoid of logic or sense.