Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Homeowners' rallying cry: Produce the note
Monterey County Herald ^ | 17 Feb 09 | Mitch Stacy

Posted on 02/19/2009 3:05:01 PM PST by Notary Sojac

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last
Even though it's endorsed by a Democrat, this makes perfect sense to me.
1 posted on 02/19/2009 3:05:05 PM PST by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

Interesting tactic, but don’t forget that she owes the money!


2 posted on 02/19/2009 3:08:24 PM PST by Buck W. (The President of the United States IS named Schickelgruber...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac
"Don't leave your home," she said. "Because you know what? When those companies say they have your mortgage, unless you have a lawyer that can put his or her finger on that mortgage, you don't have that mortgage, and you are going to find they can't find the paper up there on Wall Street."

I see. You owe nothing, because a lawyer said so.......

3 posted on 02/19/2009 3:08:37 PM PST by ScreamingFist (Annihilation - The result of underestimating your enemies. NRA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac
"I'm going to hang on for dear life until they can prove to me it belongs to them," said Lovelace, a 50-year-old divorced mother who owns a $200,000 home in Zephyrhills, near Tampa. "I'll try everything I can because it's all I have left."

sounds like theft

4 posted on 02/19/2009 3:13:36 PM PST by GeronL (Hey, won't you be my Face Book friend??)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.

It is just a delay in proving who owes on the property, not who OWNs it. The liens filed in court will show someone other than the tenant owns it. It may not be the one with the current debt load, but the homeowner still can’t clear it. Eventually the paperwork will be tracked down or deposed legally. Forestalling like this only lengthens the end. Were all this happening under a different administration I’d say it was immoral. However, given the absolutely unfair and unethical legistlations these baboons have just enacted, MORE POWER TO THE TACTIC!


5 posted on 02/19/2009 3:14:02 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

She’s a thief.


6 posted on 02/19/2009 3:14:16 PM PST by icwhatudo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ScreamingFist
I see. You owe nothing, because a lawyer said so.......

The legal point is that it is no longer clear to whom the homeowner owes the money. If the note was assigned to someone else, and the debtor pays the original creditor, she could get sued again by the assignee. So a good lawyer for the debtor will make sure that the creditor who is suing is still the owner of the note.

7 posted on 02/19/2009 3:14:16 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Buck W.
Yes, but to whom? I certainly would not want to enter into an agreement with a creditor and then find out that someone else actually held the debt.

If you want to confiscate a secured property, you have to prove you are entitled to it. That's what being a nation of laws is about.

8 posted on 02/19/2009 3:14:37 PM PST by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

It’s theft.


9 posted on 02/19/2009 3:14:51 PM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

It is theft of compensation for use; in the end, ownership (unless Zer0 outright seizes it and gives away) will be assigned to the rightful owner.


10 posted on 02/19/2009 3:16:21 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Of course, there would have been no story here if the original issuer of the note had held onto it for a few years. Like they used to. In America.


11 posted on 02/19/2009 3:16:52 PM PST by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

It’s true. I spoke to quickly. It’s not theft necessarily.

It’s certainly attempted theft.


12 posted on 02/19/2009 3:17:31 PM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

This will result in higher costs to the lender which will be passed on to other consumers and reduced investor profits. The bank needs the proper paperwork but if the occupant (not owner) doesn’t live up to the terms of the contract they have to give up the banks property. These folks are advocating theft, pure and simple.


13 posted on 02/19/2009 3:17:46 PM PST by Eagles6 ( Typical White Guy: Christian, Constitutionalist, Heterosexual, Redneck. (Let them eat arugula!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski
But they need to LEGALLY prove they own the mortgage. And if they failed to keep the necessary paperwork on hand, that is THEIR responsibility, not yours. In fact, I believe these same banks worked to defeat legislation that had more stringent requirements for mortgage change of owner notification.

Since when do they get to take legal action without producing paperwork?

14 posted on 02/19/2009 3:18:16 PM PST by Notary Sojac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

This is exactly what every last person who has this situation should do. If these guys are throwing around funny-financial instruments without taking care of their paperwork, then they deserve to either lose the case or have it thrown out or delayed for as long as possible.

I know when I had to deal with this kind of paperwork in court (for apartments, in my case), that if I didn’t have all my paperwork in order, I would lose. I didn’t ever lose, because I did make sure it was in order. That’s the responsibility of those guys who are carrying the mortgage. If they don’t have it in order — they should lose the case. It’s that simple.


15 posted on 02/19/2009 3:18:32 PM PST by Star Traveler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

Right there with ya on that....


16 posted on 02/19/2009 3:20:00 PM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

EXCELLENT.

A simple request shows up how the whole damn con scam game worked.

If you can’t show mortgage ownership, how can you foreclose.

More power to them.

**** the Bankers!


17 posted on 02/19/2009 3:20:31 PM PST by swarthyguy ("We may be crazy in Pakistan, but not completely out of our minds," ISI Gen. Ahmed Shujaa Pasha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

Succinct and on point.


18 posted on 02/19/2009 3:21:25 PM PST by Be_Politically_Erect (Block HR 45 Blair Holt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac

I think the record of her payment of the loan for who knows how long ought to be sufficient proof. Perhaps they could use discovery to obtain a copy of the note from her, or use interrogatories to investigate just why she made payments on a note she now denies (by force of logic) having signed.

It’s attempted theft, hiding behind the technicalities of the law.


19 posted on 02/19/2009 3:22:03 PM PST by Petronski (For the next few years, Gethsemane will not be marginal. We will know that garden. -- Cdl. Stafford)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Notary Sojac
In this case relief lets her be a theif. You and I and all productive people will pay for this manipulative grasshopper. Why should she be allowed to refute a legitimate debt by a legal trick?

That is not liberty and it will make slaves of the rest of us. Terrible.

20 posted on 02/19/2009 3:22:04 PM PST by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-103 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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