dafinch wrote:I asked a simple question about a 2 sentence clause
dafinch wrote:If you have an actual answer as why the clause doesn't mean what I think it does, I'm all ears.
Sometimes I'm a sucker so I'll make 1 attempt at that. Scenario as you presented:
You entered a mortgage agreement with Entity A to buy a house, you agreed to pay the debt in full including interest. Said debt includes a clause that says (paraphrased) "when debt is paid, lien on property will be removed and borrower will have full ownership and title of property"
Note: Legal eagles, feel free to correct any aspect of my layman understanding.
You then used said money from loan, paid the previous owner of the property and took possession of the property. This leaves you with the property and a debt in the form of an unpaid mortgage.
What you are missing - deliberately or inadvertently only you know:
Entity A gets into trouble... they are going bankrupt, they don't wish to be responsible for the debt anymore, whatever the reason - doesn't matter.
Entity A sells their interest* in the mortgage to Entity B. You have no legal say** what Entity A does with their side of the mortgage agreement, their value of the loan.
Entity A informs you they have no more interest in the mortgage so you can stop paying them.
Entity B informs you they purchased Entity A's value of the mortgage and you now owe them instead.
You still have your legal obligations of the loan, but you owe them to Entity B.
Entity B now has Entity A's obligations of the loan. This means, as just one example, Entity B has to accept the interest rate agreement for the period defined by the loan. They can't suddenly raise the interest rate on you from 3% to 8%.
Let's put the concept outlined above in an example.
Person A owns a property.
You enter a 5 year rental agreement with Person A to pay $300 a month.
The rental agreement says that if you pay the full amount $300*60 you don't owe anything else for the rest of the time period even if it's your first day into rent. In short, you "get possession guaranteed for the 5 year period".
Two months into the agreement Person A decides to retire and move to the bahamas. So they sell the property to person B who buys the propert for $500,000 - which is a lot more then what you owe for the full period $18,000.
Person B now owns the property, and is required by Law to uphold the rental agreement for the rest of the 5 years.
You now own Person B the $300 per month rent - to a total of $18,000 minus what you paid Person A.
Reality: You don't suddenly get to stop paying the rent for the rest of the 5 years simply because Person B paid $500,000 for the property. But that is basically what you are saying about the mortgage. That the agreement of Bank B to buy some assets (which include your oustanding mortgage) from Bank A amount to Bank B paying off your obligation. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
*To be absolutely clear: Interest in this context means - in the context of an example: I have an interest in the health of my horse.
**Unless you thought to have a clause added, something like: if Entity A ever relinquishes the debt, any outstanding principal + interest is considered paid in full and the debt wiped clear. I can't say if that'd be a legally enforceable clause but I seriously doubt any lender would ever agree to such a clause being in a loan agreement.
What in the world does a rental contract have to do with a mortgage agreement? That doesn't make a lick of sense. And, I'm speaking about a clause in a specific contract, so, let me put this to you:
Upon payment of all sums secured by this Security Instrument, Lender shall instruct Trustee to release this Security Instrument and surrender all notes evidencing debt secured by this Security Instrument to Trustee. Trustee shall release this security instrument.”
What does "PAYMENT OF ALL SUMS" mean? Where does it say that said payment must be made by the borrower? It has to be paid, alright, doesn't specify that I have to pay it. If you got my credit card bill by mistake in the mail, and, whilst paying all your bills just paid it without noticing it was somebody else's, you couldn't force me to pay it once you discovered your error, could you? Why? BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE A CONTRACT WITH ME-and neither does Wells Fargo. Now, you can, indeed, assign the contract, but there's this pesky little requirement about actually recording any such assignment in the county where the property is actually located-and, lo and behold, they didn't do it. They tried to use MERS. Take a look a the following and then tell me about the rights of a lender who uses a "nominee" with nine, count' em, NINE violations, but you're telling me that the clause doesn't mean what is says? Are you REALLY gonna sit there and say that I have a contract with Wells Fargo(and, as I've shown, they have such a spotless reputation in these matters and are always right, lol)?
Wednesday, July 09, 2014
Between myself and my attorneys Robert Hager, Treva Hearne, Mark Mausert and Rick Lawsuit we have spent 8 years of research and finally proved in the Phoenix Arizona United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Case No. 11–17615 Decided: June 12, 2014, that MERSCORP does not have any standing to act as a Nominee. Beneficiary, owner of notes and is not licensed to negotiate mortgage loans. ( http://cloudedtitlesblog.com/2014/06/16 ... s-circuit/
) ( See below )
Furthermore the federal and state laws have no previsions for creating digitized documents. The law was written around the authenticity or original embossed documents with original signatures with signed names of real people of authority. Further Investigation brought us to the question why did MERSCORP have to resort to fabrication the documents what were they really hiding.
Banks Created and funded Mortgage Electronic Systems to handle electronic filing and to track the investors as monies transferred from the pool and were to be distributed into investor trenches. Most loans banks are only a servicer and service for the given trenches and monies came from the investors around the world never having to fund the loans.
Once banks created a loan banks and MERSCORP dropped the ball never tracking the investors and failed to complete the IRS 976 form and complete the transfer to the REMIC pooling Trenches within the 90 day allotted time. With tax evasion and severed notes banks lost all authority to claim a secured debt as they no longer had a § 3-301. PERSON ENTITLED TO ENFORCE THE INSTRUMENT. So creating Mortgage Electronic Systems to hide the fraud and to fabricate documents with fake people signing and or had no authority to sign was the only way out to collect as a secured instrument and foreclose on homes.
As homeowners become wiser it is becoming harder and harder for servicers to foreclose eventually Servicers will simply be forced to walk away from foreclosures. The current Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. is the third generation of companies with the same name established as of 1/1/1999. The original "MERS" first became the acronym, an abbreviation for the first Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., in 1995. This corporation was registered in Delaware on October 16, 1995.
In 1997 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. registered "MERS" as the service mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USTPO) for its mortgage loan eRegistry system. This original Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. Corporation has merged with other entities created by its executives and board of directors to and changes its name replacing it over the past 18 years.
Although the 1995 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (version #1) created the MERS service mark and system - it no longer existed after the name change to MERSCORP, Inc. as of 1/1/1999 and then again to MERSCORP Holdings, Inc. on 2/27/2012 which is the owner and operator of the eRegistry but it is not disclosed in the mortgages. Homeowners did not contract with the eRegistry Corporation. It has to be clarified in a court room the exact name MERSCORP now uses, and also has to be noted in the state of California MERSCORP, MERs, and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems does not have a registered agent that is current and is not licensed in the State as having a business license. Only being licensed in Delaware for merely transferring and recording documents.
MERSCORP has no authority to discuss loans including loan creation and or modifications such as large banks retain the proper licenses to do so. MERSCORP and the banks have devised a system to fool the state and federal courts and the IRS being the largest master fraud scheme in history. In addition once a note is bifurcated and claimed severed into the investment pools it can never be brought back to a whole which adds to more document fabrication.
List of MERSCORP violations
1.) Assignments were made by “officers” of MERS using delegations of authority of no longer existing MERS predecessor corporations.
2.) The MERS Assignment is deficient because it omits an assertion that the assignor is the holder under the MERS registry for the MIN number of the mortgage being assigned and the transfer is being recorded on the MERS registry.
3.) An interest in a mortgage cannot be conveyed by an endorsement of the mortgage note in blank.
4.) The Officers of MERS who are allegedly authorized to sign documents on behalf of MERS are not “officers” of the corporation as the term officer of a corporation is legally defined.
5.) Because MERS is a mere custodian with no legal or beneficial interest in the mortgage note, MERS cannot assign a mortgage note to an assignee.
6.) Because MERS is a mere custodian with no legal or beneficial interest in the mortgage note, the mortgage has been divided from the note rendering the mortgage unenforceable.
7.) MERS holding of the note endorsed in blank as nominee of a mortgage sold to a mortgage backed securities trust is a violation of REMIC requirements.
8.) MERS holding of the note endorsed in blank as nominee of a mortgage sold to a mortgage backed securities trust is a violation of warranties and representation contained in the master pooling and servicing agreement and prospectus.
9.) MERS was created to perform a service with an illegal purpose, namely to circumvent the recordation of assignments and payment of recording fees. The issuance of assignments in furtherance of such an illegal purpose is unenforceable.
An assignment of the mortgage note from MERS to the servicer of a note is of either of no legal effector an illegal conversion of the note. Violating the peoples constitutional rights Fabricating documents Banks violate homeowner’s constitutionalrights under the First, Fifth, Sixth, Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the Constitution and committed certain violations of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”). Intentional planned fraud to fabricate to steal homeowner’s is a violation to the 18 U.S. Code Chapter 96 - RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS and The Sovereignty rest with the People.
Allowing banks and MERSCORP to carry on fabricating and stealing homes has become the norm for banks. This has to stop and be stopped now. People Corporation could not function.
I hope my affidavit is considered in court because if not the economy as a whole is in a severe stance in relation to war as investors are not paid in this intent of banking fraud.