U.S. Foreclosure Map as of July, 2007. Click the map for more info.
Deutsche Bank Foreclosures Tossed Out of Ohio Federal Court - “They Own Nothing!”
Excerpt:
Judge Boyko issued an order requiring the Plaintiffs in a number of pending foreclosure cases to file a copy of the executed Assignment demonstrating Plaintiff (Deutsche Bank) was the holder and owner of the Note and Mortgage as of the date the Complaint was filed, or the court would enter a dismissal.The Court’s amended General Order No. 2006-16 requires Plaintiff (Deutsche Bank) to submit an affidavit along with the complaint, which identifies Plaintiff as the original mortgage holder, or as an assignee, trustee or successor-interest.
Apparently Deutsche bank submitted several affidavits that claim that Deutsche was in fact the owner of the mortgage note, but none of these affidavits mention assignment or trust or successor interest.
Thus, the Judge ruled that in every instance, these submissions create a “conflict” and they “do not satisfy” the burden of demonstrating at the time of filing the complaint, that Deutsche Bank was in fact the “legal” note holder.
* * * Jacksonville Area Legal Aid Attorney, April Charney says:
This court order is what I have been saying in my cases. This is rampant fraud on every court in America or nonjudicial foreclosure fraud where the securitized trusts are filing foreclosures when they never own/hold the mortgage loan at the commencement of the foreclosure.That means that the loans are clearly in default at the time of any eventual transfer of the ownership of the mortgage loans to the trusts. This means that the loans are being held by the originating lenders after the alleged “sale” to the trust despite what it says per the pooling and servicing agreements and despite what the securities laws require.
This also means that many securitized trusts don’t really, legally own these bad loans .
In my cases, many of the trusts try to argue equitable assignment that predates the filing of the foreclosure, but a securitized trust cannot take an equitable assignment of a mortgage loan. It also means that the securitized trusts own nothing.
I agree with the FR posters who say that the Judge's order in this case leaves a door open for news cases to be filed. Judge Boyko never had reason to reach the larger issue of deeper fraud by the mortgage companies and/or Deutsche Bank. In point of fact, DB could have been just another victim of fraud is this case . . . I mean fraud by Wall Street . . . not the home buyers !
Spreaking hypothetically -- IF Deutsche Bank was sold bogus mortgage paper by Wall Street.
There have been rumors on WS for months about packages of securitized mortgages selling the same bad paper over and over and over again. Perhaps this is the single most important judicial decision to come down the pike in years. If it exposes bogus paper being marketed on Wall Street hidden in piles and piles of junk paper!
Personally, I believe the lawyers for DB must have advised their clients about potential adverse consequences. But given the fact that more attorneys are owned by organized crime today . . . Who knows what was known and what was shared between rich men in confidence.
Which gives rise to another meaning of the term 'confidence men' . . . LOL, LOL !