Modern Day Rosa Parks Jailed as Domestic Terrorist: God-Fearing Woman Exposes Foreclosure Fraud

Edstrom_MortgageSecuritization_POSTER_17_x_22_v4_1Modern Day Rosa Parks Jailed as Domestic Terrorist: God-Fearing Woman Exposes Foreclosure Fraud

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

From Charles Koppa

Modern Day Rosa Parks Jailed As Domestic Terrorist:

God-Fearing Woman Exposes Foreclosure Fraud

Who:              Family and Friends of Barbara Bratton, Homeowners’ Rights Advocate

What:             Pre-Preliminary Conference (Court Hearing)

When:            Monday, June 24, 2014, 8:30 a.m.

Where:          Dept. S22, San Bernardino Superior Court

351 N. Arrowhead, San Bernardino, CA. 92415 Map

Ignoring well-documented cases of fraud and abuse that continue to plague the home mortgage industry, the City of Ontario Police Department has instead set its sights on Barbara Bratton, 55, jailed as a domestic terrorist for challenging the validity of property records used to foreclose on her loan.  A pre-preliminary conference is set for Monday, June 24 at 8:30am in San Bernardino Superior Court, 351 N. Arrowhead, San Bernardino, CA 92415.  Homeowners’ rights advocates will be on hand to show support.


Barbara Bratton, a life-long resident of Ontario, California and an outstanding community member, was the victim of an illegal foreclosure on her family home of 40 years.  Since 2008 she has conducted a tireless and well-documented campaign to expose the land title fraud on her home.  An important piece in this complex case came last year, when a Lending Processing Services (LPS) executive pled guilty to filing more than a million fraudulent property documents in county recorder’s offices across the country.  The fraud on the Bratton home was linked to the suit.  Yet the LPS scheme masked a more insidious crime: the securitization of nearly all home loans since 1996, making it impossible to determine who, if anyone, actually owns the note on a home.

Continue reading “Modern Day Rosa Parks Jailed as Domestic Terrorist: God-Fearing Woman Exposes Foreclosure Fraud”

Failure to Allege Lack of Default

Edstrom_MortgageSecuritization_POSTER_17_x_22_v4_1Failure to Allege Lack of Default

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

One of the main reasons many cases do not make it to daylight is because of the failure to allege lack of default.  Despite many lawyers knowing that this is the case, and that there is no default, many still fail to make the allegation.  On what basis can a lawyer allege lack of default for a homeowner facing foreclosure?

The Note and Security Instrument

The note is not the obligation but evidence of the obligation (for proof of this, in many cases the security instrument refers to the note as the evidence of the obligation).  Lawyers usually describe the obligation arising when one party accepts money from another party.  The note usually describes who the parties are that are obligated in the section titled OBLIGATIONS OF PERSONS UNDER THIS NOTE.  This section of the note states:

If more than one person signs this Note, each person is fully and personally obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note, including the promise to pay the full amount owed.  Any person who is a guarantor, surety or endorser of this Note is also obligated to do these things.  Any person who takes over these obligations, including the obligations of a guarantor, surety or endorser of this note, is also obligated to keep all of the promises made in this Note.  The Note Holder may enforce its rights under this Note against each person individually or against all of us together.  This means that any one of us may be required to pay all of the amounts owed under this Note.

Continue reading “Failure to Allege Lack of Default”

SEC Corroborates Livinglies Position on Third Party Payment While Texas BKR Judge Disallows Assignments After Cut-Off Date

SEC Corroborates Livinglies Position on Third Party Payment While Texas BKR Judge Disallows Assignments After Cut-Off Date

By Neil Garfield
Garfield Gwaltney Kelley and White | LivingLies

Maybe this should have been divided into three articles:

  1. Saldivar: Texas BKR Judge finds Assignment Void not voidable. It never happened.
  2. Erobobo: NY Judge rules ownership of note is burden of the banks. Not standing but rather capacity to sue without injury.
  3. SEC Orders Credit Suisse to disgorge illegal profits back to investors. Principal balances of borrowers may be reduced. Defaults might not exist because notices contain demands that include money held by banks that should have been paid to investors.

But these decisions are so interrelated and their effect so far-reaching that it seems to me that if you read only one of them you might head off in the wrong direction. Pay careful attention to the Court’s admonition in Erobobo that these defenses can be waived unless timely raised. Use the logic of these decisions and you will find more and more judges listening with increasing care. The turning point is arriving and foreclosures — past, present and future — might finally get the review and remedies that are required in a nation of laws.

Continue reading “SEC Corroborates Livinglies Position on Third Party Payment While Texas BKR Judge Disallows Assignments After Cut-Off Date”

Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 2

Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 2

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

Two Oregon Supreme Court Rulings came out yesterday relating to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.  The first was Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co. (June 6, 2013), and the subject of this post, which is Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al. (June 6, 2013).

Note the following quotes from this ruling:

That is so because, on the present record, MERS’ involvement in the appointment of the current trustee casts doubt on the trustee’s status.


But, appointments of a successor trustee may only be made by the trust deed beneficiary, ORS 86.790(3), and, as discussed, MERS is not, and never has been, the beneficiary of the trust deed for purposes of the OTDA.

The ruling is listed in part as follows:

          En Banc

          On review from the Court of Appeals.*

         Argued and submitted on January 8, 2013.

         Gregory A. Chaimov, Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Portland, argued the cause for
petitioner on review Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. With him on the
brief were Frederick B. Burnside and Kevin H. Kono.

         W. Jeffrey Barnes, pro hac vice, W. J. Barnes, PA, Beverly Hills, argued the cause
for respondent on review. With him on the brief was Elizabeth Lemoine, Makler
Lemoine & Goldberg, PC, Portland.

         Hope A. Del Carlo, Portland, filed a brief on behalf of amicus curiae Oregon Trial
Lawyers Association.
         Rolf C. Moan, Assistant Attorney General, Salem, filed a brief on behalf of
amicus curiae State of Oregon.


         The decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. The judgment of the circuit
court is reversed, and the case is remanded to that court for further proceedings.

         Kistler, J., concurred in part and specially concurred in part and wrote an opinion
in which Balmer, C.J. joined.
         *Appeal from Clackamas County Circuit Court, Henry C. Breithaupt, Judge. 251
Or App 278, 284 P3d 1157 (2012).

Continue reading “Niday v. GMAC Mortgage LLC, et al – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 2”

Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co. – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 1

Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co. – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 1

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

The Oregon Supreme Court was asked four questions, and answered as follows:

We accepted the district court’s certification and allowed the parties in the federal cases to
present their views. We answer those questions — in two instances as reframed — as

(1) “No.” For purposes of ORS 86.735(1), the “beneficiary” is the lender to whom the obligation that the trust deed secures is owed or the lender’s successor in interest. Thus, an entity like MERS, which is not a lender, may not be a trust deed’s “beneficiary,” unless it is a lender’s successor in interest.

(2) We reframe the second question as follows:
Is MERS eligible to serve as beneficiary under the Oregon Trust DeedAct where the trust deed provides that MERS “holds only legal title to the interests granted by Borrower in this Security Instrument, but, if necessary to comply with law or custom, MERS as nominee for Lender and Lender’s successors and assigns) has the right: to exercise any or all of those interests”?

Continue reading “Brandrup v. ReconTrust Co. – MERS Ruling in Oregon Part 1”

Underwater Properties

Underwater Properties

By Jim Macklin
Secure Document Research

Underwater Properties

Continue reading “Underwater Properties”

FDIC Purchase and Assumption Agreements

FDIC Purchase and Assumption Agreements

By Daniel Edstrom
DTC Systems, Inc.

Along with the large number of failed banks, there are a large number of Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Purchase and Assumption Agreements.  The National Consumer Law Center was kind enough to publish many of them at the following web page:

Here is the list of Purchase and Assumption Agreements available, as well as some other information:

Purchase and Assumption Agreements

1st American State Bank
1st Centennial Bank
1st Pacific Bank of California
Access Bank
Affinity Bank
All American Bank (amendment)
Allegiance Bank of North America
Alliance Bank
Alpha Bank & Trust
Amcore Bank

Continue reading “FDIC Purchase and Assumption Agreements”

Staggering Statistical Anomaly

Staggering Statistical Anomaly

By Jim Macklin
Secure Document Research

There is a staggering statistical anomaly that must be brought to light in the wake of the foreclosure crisis that has crippled capital markets across the globe. While Wall St. had its profits see glorious heights never imagined before, mid-stream America saw trillions in equity slip through their fingers.
Hedge fund managers sought to “sell-forward” as much of the tainted paper as could be heaped onto unsuspecting investment groups. Teachers’ retirement funds, firefighters, state and county workers, you know, the hardest working people in the world, were made promises of “AAA” ratings, with derivatives as a hedge against the unlikely scenario of mass defaults. When the door swung shut, and the folks who were shoveling sh*t and calling it sugar  ran out of money and ran for cover…millions of homes were nearly instantaneously lost to the phantoms who were behind the entire scheme…Wall St. investment bankers.
Without any skin in the game, Wall St. has single-handedly run the biggest equity/land grab in the history of mankind…and nobody seems to mind. This leaves an inventory of empty homes strewn across this nation like an abandoned game of ball & jacks of massive proportions.
Here we go… in the United States today, there are over 18.5 million houses with nobody living in them. In the United States today, we have over 3.75 million homeless persons. The formulaic equation applied here is simple: every homeless person in the U.S. could occupy 6 homes each!
Think about the rationale being espoused to the general public through the media. The banks have taken over 1.7 trillion dollars in relief of one form or another as a result of their own careless actions. Meanwhile, millions of service veterans, single mothers, children, and innocent victims of “bad times” are filling the streets and shelters. But does anyone at the bank lift a finger to state the obvious? Of course not. The bank, instead, hordes the millions of vacant homes and simply waits for a large group of investors, or an even larger group of new, upcoming credit worthy younger Americans to pony up even more money for a home that has been prostituted out to anyone who temporarily qualifies as a “good risk”.
Does everyone see what I see? Is this not the easiest fix, making the most sense for all parties concerned? For those not yet putting this two piece puzzle together (CONGRESS), public placement of homeless, disparaged, displaced persons into a caretaker position, even if merely temporary, to insure maintenance and property care to the empty homes, and people who truly need the shelter get a place to call home…even if only temporary. One could assemble a master team of the most regionally qualified persons in need of temporary assistance (they’re not hard to locate, just go to the local shelters and ask for someone who might be interested in a home), set a rotational system of caretaking for the 6 homes that each homeless person could occupy and maintain while looking for more meaningful work, and a set of standards applied to the caretakers that matches what the banks are currently employing.
The average bank is spending nearly $12,000 per year in maintenance fees for these abandoned, empty houses. Do you think that the homeless, probably jobless, person would mind mowing a lawn once a week and possibly doing some light maintenance for $12 grand and a home? For those of you that are thinking “yeah, but what if they destroy the home, or turn it into a drug emporium?” What do you think is going on right now? 
So, Congress, state worker programs, Veterans Administration, Salvation Army, Wells Fargo, Bank of America… call me, I have a really cool plan that would be amazingly simple to implement. What would be the harm in trying…a benefit to someone who hasn’t paid your nominal fee for  playing the ball & jacks game you call mortgage banking? 
We’ll call it: “Homes for the Homeless”. Surely some political candidate could use this premise to further their self-preserving interests.
My next blog will address a method for re-valuing property to a true net present value and getting a fresh start. Pay attention if you own multiple properties, this could reduce your debt by hundreds of thousands of dollars, and is recognized throughout the court system without litigating or arguing (much). Strategic bankruptcy! They do work and thousands of people are saving millions of dollars through the “cram-down”.