Posted on 12 May 2010. Tags: 22 NYCRR sec. 1200.0 Rules of Professional Conduct, assignment fraud, dismissed with prejudice, jeff barnes, judge arthur schack, MERS, Mortgage Electronic registration Systems, Steven J. Baum p.c., us bank
May 12, 2010
New York Judge Arthur Schack has dismissed another foreclosure case, this time with prejudice, as a result of an illegal MERS assignment which was “executed” by an attorney in the office of counsel for the Plaintiff, finding that the alleged assignment violated the New York Rules of Professional Conduct as doing so was a conflict of interest.
The Plaintiff was US Bank, N.A. as Trustee for the SG Mortgage Securities Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2006-FRE2. The original lender was Fremont Investment and Loan. The purported Assigment of Mortgage (which did not assign the Note at all) was executed by a New York attorney as “Assistant Secretary and Vice-President” of MERS. As this attorney, signing for the assignor, listed her business address as that of the law office of the Plaintiff’s counsel (Steven J. Baum P.C.), which represented the assignee US Bank as Trustee, the Court found this to be a conflict of interest in violation of 22 NYCRR sec. 1200.0 Rules of Professional Conduct. Judge Schack dismissed US Bank’s foreclosure action with prejudice and cancelled the Lis Pendens.
We know that there are literally hundreds (if not thousands) of these MERS assignments which have been executed by paralegals and others from the law offices of the Plaintiff’s foreclosure counsel as alleged “Vice Presidents” or “Assistant Secretarys” of MERS. This decision indicates that all such purported assignments are most likely illegal, void, and that any foreclosure action based on such an assignment should be dismissed with prejudice.
Jeff Barnes, Esq., www.ForeclosureDefenseNationwide.com
Scribd
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Posted in concealment, conspiracy, corruption, foreclosure fraud, judge arthur schack, MERS, mortgage electronic registration system, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., Mortgage Foreclosure Fraud
Posted on 12 May 2010. Tags: dinsfla, fannie mae, foreclosure fraud, Freddie Mac, instructions, servicers
They helped give away TRILLIONS!
Something old … something new … a bit of a rehash here but also some good review. Note page 24. PROCESS THE FORECLOSURE IN YOUR INSTITUTIONS NAME!
They are instructing these servicers to commit fraud!
[scribd id=31254338 key=key-25ma6k1h04togprd1yb9 mode=slideshow]
And Fannie Mae is doing it too. According to this, they instruct the servicers to just do bogus assignments depending on what they can get away with. None of the parties own the loans, not even Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae!
[scribd id=31254687 key=key-2d3sasi2ma1f7wea81lf mode=list]
WAIT FOR THE NEXT WAVE…FHA SUBPRIME DEFAULTS!
Posted in concealment, corruption, fannie mae, foreclosure fraud, Freddie Mac
Posted on 12 May 2010. Tags: cdo's, derivative mortgage-backed securities, dinsfla, foreclosures, goldman sachs, investments, Justice Department, Lynn Szymoniak ESQ, mbs, Morgan Stanley, securities, The Wall Street Journal
Securities and Investments
Morgan Stanley
Action Date: May 12, 2010
Location: New York, NY
EDITORIAL: On May 12, 2010, Morgan Stanley’s Chief Executive announced in response to a Wall Street Journal article that he was unaware of any criminal investigation by the Justice Department that his firm, like Goldman Sachs, misled investors about mortgage-backed derivative deals. The WSJ had reported that Morgan Stanley was the subject of such an investigation. In addition to determining whether the firm was betting against the very products it was promoting to investors, the Justice Department COULD investigate whether Morgan Stanley and other securities firms exercised secret control over the rating agencies, causing risky investments to get the highest ratings by these firms. The Justice Department COULD also investigate whether the mortgage-backed trusts put together by Morgan Stanley were comprised of much riskier mortgages than represented to investors. Another investigation COULD be conducted regarding the pay-outs from the insurance policies behind the CDOs and whether the servicing companies working for the trusts are collecting twice – from the insurance and from the foreclosures – and then turning around, acquiring the foreclosed properties for $10 – and profiting yet a third time. Investigators COULD even determine whether foreclosure mills working for trusts created by Morgan Stanley are now using forged proof of ownership to foreclose because Morgan Stanley never acquired the mortgages, notes and assignments they claimed to have in their vaults, backing the mortgage-backed securities. In the battle between the Justice Department and Wall Street, Goliath is in New York, not D.C.
Posted in cdo, concealment, conspiracy, foreclosure, foreclosure fraud, fraud digest, goldman sachs, Lynn Szymoniak ESQ, S.E.C., securitization
