Why sloppy foreclosure process could ruin Florida

St. Petersburg Times ^ | 10/3/2010 | Robert Trigaux

[Chunga85]

There's no polite way to put this. A growing cancer is infecting the backlogged legal process of foreclosing on hundreds of thousands of homes in Florida.

It's endangering the legal and economic stability of this state. And it's exposing an appalling lack of leadership, first for allowing such a breakdown in the legal system and, now, for failing to own up to this mess and get it fixed.

How bad is it? Laws governing who actually owns a foreclosed home are becoming so suspect a new buzzword is emerging: blighted titles. Even the tepid rebound of Florida's economy may face crippling delays in resolving hundreds of thousands of foreclosures in the Sunshine State.

What's wrong? The accuracy and truthfulness of an immense flood of legal documents and affidavits some lenders and their hired lawyers use to foreclose on homes have come under such critical attack that some major banks are suspending their court cases pending internal reviews.

[Kartographer]

Your answer begs the question if only a owner can evict how would this banks go about evicting squatters when they can't prove they own the home? Without the ability to prove you own the property how do you stop squatters from claiming Squatters Rights if they move in and pay the taxes on the property?

[null and void]

Here’s the deal.

What do Meg Whitman, your mortgage/foreclosure, Barack Hussein Obama II, millions of illegal aliens and untold numbers of multi-dipping welfare recipients have in common?

Falsified documents.

Meg Whitman hired an illegal alien with proper looking forged documents.

Your bank will cheerfully produce proper looking forged documents to seize your house.

One of Obama’s proxies produced a somewhat proper looking forged document and posted it on the ‘net to “prove” his eligibility to rule America.

Millions of illegal aliens are using forged documents in levels of quality ranging from near perfect to piss-poor to sap the American economy.

Multiple fake and genuine fraudulent IDs enable a large cadre of welfare recipients to receive scores of welfare checks each.

---

When enough Americans become aware of the true scope of the problem - at the retail level they’ve lost their houses, at the wholesale level they’ve lost their country and its wealth, there will be a clamor for a solution the likes of which the world has never seen.

---

What’s the common thread? Bad documents.

What’s the simple, obvious and wrong solution?

Mandatory perfect, permanent and un-couterfeitable ID that cannot be lost stolen or altered.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to foreclosed homeowners and anyone worried about foreclosure as a way of insuring absolute clear title and ownership.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to patriots as a means of insuring a foreign born usurper will never again occupy the White House.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to employers as a flawless way of insuring they only hire people qualified to work in the United States.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to Congress as a way of insuring everyone accurately pays their taxes.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to taxpayers as a means of insuring that welfare queens are detected and eliminated from the system.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to republicans as a means of eliminating voter fraud.

It and the related “bulletproof” electronic records will be sold to...

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

[Chunga85]

"Second, every person who owns a house has their title on file with the county recorder. When you buy a house, you get a deed from the seller, and it is recorded. If you finance the purchase price, at the same time as the deed is recorded, the "note and deed of trust" are recorded with the county recorder. They are all public records."

Except ALL 62 million mortgages or Deeds of Trust that name MERS as "nominee". The taxes, recording fees, and doc stamps were never paid. Deadbeats!

[Matchett-PI]

"...every person who owns a house has their title on file with the county recorder. When you buy a house, you get a deed from the seller, and it is recorded..."

Not in Florida, nor in any other State in the Union that I know of. There is NO requirement to record your deed. All a recorded deed does is to give notice to the world that you own a property. Nothing prevents you from deeding your property to another party (even unbeknownst to them), getting it notarized, and putting it in a safe deposit box.

This is one of the ways people make themselves "judgement proof", or keep their property out of probate. Just because it shows in the public record that someone owns a property, doesn't make it so. They may have deeded it to a member of their family, or another person who is, or is not, in on what is going on. Florida is a Homestead State, so anyone claiming a Homestead exemption on such a property, will have to pay the back RE taxes from which they claimed exemption, or they will become a lien against the owner, and possibly against the "hidden" owner AND the property, if and when the deed is ever produced. In that case the back taxes will be paid and the person can just keep on truckin'.

[listenhillary]

Then the Democrats couldn’t cheat on elections.

I get your point though.

[null and void]

Yep. That’s how they get the republicans to vote for it.

[agere_contra]

Don't sweat it. The Mark of the Beast is about Islam.

The Mark of the Beast is not, as many believe, 666, and it has nothing to do with barcodes and microchips.

As recorded by St John the 'mark' looks like the Greek letters Chi, Xi and Sigma-Tau (a ligature of Sigma and Tau).

More usefully, here is an image of the so-called “666” from the Codex Vaticanus of Revelation which dates to around 350 AD - 200 to 300 years after John wrote Revelation. These marks are often - and erroneously - interpreted as '666' when they are in fact a simple image.

Let's look at that again:

That's a pretty good match, albeit without the X-shape on the left.

But where did I get this greenish symbol on the right? Here's a bit more of it:

I turn it 90 degrees, mirror it and pan out ...

The two symbols on the right are the Bismallah - the Name of Allah. The Mark of the Beast is the Name of Allah. The 'number of the Beast' is a poor translation - it should be the 'Multitude' of the Beast - the host of those marked with the sign of Allah.

But what about that big X-shape? That's in the Mark of the Beast as well. What could that be? I'm not sure, but it looks awfully familiar ...

And what about the Mark of the Beast being worn on arm and head? Was St John talking of headbands and armbands?

It's not very clear, but you can just make out the X-shaped swords and the middle symbol on this piece of material:

And if we pull out a bit, we get the whole thing - this is an image of a armband belonging to Hamas:

I got these images from this PDF. It's well written and worth reading in its entirety. The Bismallah - the Name of Allah - worn on head and arm by fanatical jihadists the world over - is the Mark of the Beast.

Hope this is helpful

The Mark of the Beast is not, as many believe, 666, and it has nothing to do with barcodes and microchips.

And what about the Mark of the Beast being worn on arm and head? Was St John talking of headbands and armbands?

[null and void]

Hope this is helpful

Helpful?

Dunno.

Interesting?

Certainly!

[Defiant]

Not in Florida, nor in any other State in the Union that I know of. There is NO requirement to record your deed.

That is true. Maybe it would occur in some kind of inter-family transfer or some unusual situation, but in 99.9 percent of home transfers, the buyer records a deed so that a third party purchaser will have notice of their ownership, and so cannot take legal title away from them. If you accept a transfer from someone without recording the deed, you are usually trying to get away with something (taxes) AND you really, really trust the transferor (like it's your mom).

That has nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to a ridiculous argument that a foreclosing bank should make the owner produce the papers showing title. If you have a foreclosing bank, you have a recorded title. In 100 percent of the cases. If there was a subsequent unrecorded transfer, the bank doesn't care; they have priority.

[Joan Kerrey]

until the recipients of that money can show they are legally entitled to it.

Some of the mortgages were sliced and diced so many times that to prove ownership might be a tough task. But, at least Freddie and Fannie are sound (lol) /s

[Defiant]

Except ALL 62 million mortgages or Deeds of Trust that name MERS as "nominee".

I think in almost all of those situations, there was an originating lender that would be on the note and deed of trust. They then assigned it to MERS. If the documents proving the assignment can't be found or don't exist, then there is a problem. Hence the point of the article.

And yes, in many instances there should be fees and taxes paid on the assignments and these usually were not paid. It is a big mess.

My guess is that in many instances there will be a way to go back to the originating lender or its successor and clean up the paperwork. In a few cases, someone may get off lucky. It's not that horrid. Imagine if you got a loan from a guy, and give him your furniture as security. The guy decides to move back home to India and sells the loan to Rajiv, his buddy. Two years later, Rajiv can't find the loan papers. You may end up getting out of the loan if he can't prove it existed or that it remains due. You may end up having to pay the loan (if he can prove that there was a loan) but not have to give up your furniture (since Rajiv can't prove the security interest or provide it to the court).

That is like what we have here. If Rajiv can get hold of the original lender, though, he can get a fed ex from India with the proper transfers, and maybe he can even find the security interest. If the original lender is dead, though, Rajiv may be screwed.

Some of the banks who originated these loans are dead. If there is someone who can be legally proven to be their successor, you might be able to clean this up. If not, it might be get out jail free day for some lucky homeowners. It will be between them and their consciences whether to pay back.

It is also a situation that breeds fraud. How easy is it for a lender to fill in a phony signature on a phony stamp and attempt to prove that the transfers actually did occur? It apparently is happening a lot; lenders who do that should go to jail, because THAT threatens the entire system just as much as anything.

[Defiant]

Everything you said is true. I wasn’t saying anything about what the banks are doing, I was responding to someone who said that banks ought to make homeowners show their title.

[Kartographer]

And yes, in many instances there should be fees and taxes paid on the assignments and these usually were not paid. It is a big mess.

So if you didn’t follow the proscribed process on the assignments, you didn’t pay the fees and taxes how could the assignments be legal? And if those actions were supposed to be done at the time of transfer and now in some cases years have passed since the time these actions should have been complete can you now go back now and legally do them?

[longtermmemmory]

thanks

[longtermmemmory]

after seven years a suit to quite title.

IOW the defective claims are stipped off the property and the title is cleared.

[longtermmemmory]

not every state uses “deed of trust”

[Fundamentally Fair]

That presents a problem.

I'm surprised that some here cannot see that.

[Matchett-PI]

"That has nothing to do with the point I was making, which was in response to a ridiculous argument that a foreclosing bank should make the owner produce the papers showing title. If you have a foreclosing bank, you have a recorded title. In 100 percent of the cases. If there was a subsequent unrecorded transfer, the bank doesn't care; they have priority."

That's true. For purposes of the discussion (mortgage foreclosure) I was negligent in not makinig it clear that I was only talking about an unencumbered property.

[Neidermeyer]

His tactic was to demand to see the contract that the debtor signed.
****************************************************
That is so 5 years ago ... April Charney is who you are thinking about ... The truth is that the foreclosing parties named have no right to foreclose and that the supporting documents simply don’t exist because the sales and transfers they attest to NEVER REALLY HAPPENED and in the case of the mortgage note the standard procedure was to scan and shred...

[Neidermeyer]

There are a BOATLOAD of mortgages that actually have MERS named on the note as the lender/Mortgage holder (and not as “nominee” for xxxx ,, which would be in a PSA anyway and not the note) ,, maybe it’s only a million or two but they are definately VOID documents...