Posted on 24 March 2011. Tags: breach of contract, Chase Home Finance, foreclosure, Freddie Mac, GMAC, law offices of david J. stern plantation florida 33324, MetLife, Nationstar Mortgage, Ocwen Loan Servicing, PNC Bank National Association, Space Coast Credit Union
According to DBR:
The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp. was sued by Florida attorney David Stern, who claims he is owed $1.3 million for legal services, according to a complaint filed today.
The government-run mortgage company breached its contract with Stern’s law firm by failing to pay, according to the complaint filed in federal court in Miami.
Recap of previous stunners [links]:
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD
Posted on 24 March 2011. Tags: affidavits, announcment, assignmnet of mortgage, certifying officers, fannie mae, foreclosure, foreclosure fraud, Freddie Mac, halt, MERS, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., SafeSMART, seized, servicers, SmartSAFE, stop, Wave eSignSystems
Effective April 1, servicers managing Freddie Mac loans will no longer be allowed to foreclose on properties in the name of Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems (MERS).
Freddi Mac’s announcement states
We have updated the Guide to eliminate the option for the foreclosure counsel or trustee to conduct a
foreclosure in the name of MERS. Effective for Mortgages registered with MERS that are referred to
foreclosure on or after April 1, 2011, Servicers must prepare an assignment of the Security Instrument
from MERS to the Servicer and instruct the foreclosure counsel or trustee to foreclose in the Servicer’s
name and take title in Freddie Mac’s name.
As required in Section 66.17, Foreclosing in the Servicer’s Name, Servicers must record the prepared
assignment where required by State law. State mandated recording fees are not reimbursable by Freddie
Mac, are not considered part of the Freddie Mac allowable attorney fees and must not be billed to the
Borrower.
Servicers should refer to updated Section 66.17 and Section 66.54, Vesting the Title and Avoiding
Transfer Taxes, for additional information.
Scribd
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD
Posted on 24 March 2011. Tags: assignment of mortgage, bifurcate, copy, counterfeit, deed of trust, deeds, deliberately eliminated, destroyed, esigning, evaulting, fabricated, florida, foreclosure fraud, fraudulent documents, Kelly Purcell, lost, lost note, mba, MERS, misfiled, mom, mortgage, mortgage bankers association, MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS INC., negotiable instrument, note, notes, promissory note, reproduction, securitization, software, Supreme Court, Wave eSignSystems
Before you go down to the “New Device” take a look back when THE FLORIDA BANKER’S ASSOCIATION ADMITTED THAT NOTES ARE DESTROYED:
This is a direct quote from the Florida Banker’s Association Comments to the Supreme Court of Florida files September 30, 2009:
“It is a reality of commerce that virtually all paper documents related to a note and mortgage are converted to electronic files almost immediately after the loan is closed. Individual loans, as electronic data, are compiled into portfolios which are transferred to the secondary market, frequently as mortgage-backed securities.
The reason “many firms file lost note counts as a standard alternative pleading in the complaint” is because the physical document was deliberately eliminated to avoid confusion immediately upon its conversion to an electronic file. See State Street Bank and Trust Company v. Lord, 851 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Electronic storage is almost universally acknowledged as safer, more efficient and less expensive than maintaining the originals in hard copy, which bears the concomitant costs of physical indexing, archiving and maintaining security. It is a standard in the industry and becoming the benchmark of modern efficiency across the spectrum of commerce—including the court system.”
Now if there is no issues surrounding what everyone is shouting from their roof tops, then why integrate a new software that was suppose to have been implemented already to “Improves Efficiency & Transparency of Electronic Mortgage Transactions” within MERS itself?
THEY KNOW THEY HAVE A PROBLEM!
Now from SYS-CON on SmartSAFE
“During the foreclosure crisis of the last few years we saw many instances where the original and subsequent paperwork was lost, destroyed or misfiled when loans were bought and sold,” commented Kelly Purcell, Executive Vice President for Wave’s eSignSystems division. “Mortgages are sold several times throughout the life of a loan, and electronic mortgages address the problem of the ‘lost note,’ while improving efficiency in the process.”
This will debut during next week’s MBA National Technology in Mortgage Banking Conference and Expo 2011 (at the Westin Diplomat Resort & Spa in Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.).
Will this be the new system that will eventually take over MERS as MOM?
This one is both “Smart & Safe” <wink>
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD
Posted on 24 March 2011. Tags: Antonio Simpson, assignment of mortgage, aurora loan servicing, bona fide purchaser, Darryl Matthews, deed, first magnus financial, forged documents, fulton county, georgia, John Macelray Veatch, Jr., notary fraud, quiet title, quitclaim, Raymond Wesley Veatch, security instrument, Supreme Court
“[A] forged deed is a nullity and vests no title in a grantee. [Cit.] As such, even a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a forgery cannot acquire good title from a grantee in a forged deed, or those holding under such a grantee, because the grantee has no title to convey.” Brock v. Yale Mortgage Co
AURORA LOAN SERVICES, LLC
v.
JOHN MACELRAY VEATCH, ADMR., et al.
S10A1725.
Supreme Court of Georgia.
Decided: March 18, 2011.
HINES, Justice.
In this quiet title action, the trial court entered a final order ruling that fee simple title to the subject property was vested in John Macrelay Veatch (“Veatch”), as personal representative of the estate of Raymond Wesley Veatch, Jr., unencumbered by the security deed held by Aurora Loan Services, LLC (“Aurora”), and striking various deeds from the deed records of Fulton County. Aurora appeals, and for the reasons that follow, we affirm.
Elsie Veatch owned the subject property until her death in 1974; her sole heir was Raymond Wesley Veatch, Jr., Veatch’s father, who died on March 20, 2006. After his death, two forged deeds were recorded in the Fulton County deed records, purporting to convey title to the property to Antonio Simpson. One forged deed was styled “Quitclaim Deed,” purportedly executed on May 19, 2006 by Elsie Veatch, who had then been dead for 32 years; this purported deed was recorded on October 17, 2006. The other purported deed was styled “Executors Deed,” and was purportedly executed by Raymond Wesley Veatch, Jr., on March 15, 2006, a date on which he lay in a coma; it was recorded on November 6, 2006. After these forged deeds were executed and recorded, a warranty deed purportedly from Antonio Simpson to Darryl Matthews was recorded on November 8, 2006. Matthews then executed a security deed in favor of First Magnus Financial Corporation in connection with a loan for $187,500. The security deed was eventually assigned to Aurora.
On September 5, 2007, after Veatch discovered activity on the property and applied for, and was granted, letters of administration of the estate of Raymond Wesley Veatch, Jr., he filed in the Fulton County land records an affidavit stating that the Executor’s and Quitclaim deeds were false. He then filed in the superior court the present petition to quiet title. OCGA § 23-3-40 et seq. The trial court appointed a Special Master who concluded that Aurora was a bona fide purchaser for value. See Roop Grocery Co. v. Gentry, 195 Ga. 736, 745 (1) (25 SE2d 705) (1943). However, the trial court disagreed, finding that there was record notice that the forged deeds were fraudulent, and that in any event, a forged deed is a nullity and cannot convey title.
The trial court is correct. Aurora’s interest in the property is dependent upon the forged deeds made to Antonio Simpson. As the trial court noted, such a deed cannot convey title. “[A] forged deed is a nullity and vests no title in a grantee. [Cit.] As such, even a bona fide purchaser for value without notice of a forgery cannot acquire good title from a grantee in a forged deed, or those holding under such a grantee, because the grantee has no title to convey.” Brock v. Yale Mortgage Co., 287 Ga. 849, 852 (2) (700 SE2d 583) (2010). In that opinion, this Court specifically overruled prior precedent of this Court that extended “the bona fide purchaser for value doctrine to those acquiring title under a grantee in a forged deed.” Id. at 853 (2). Accordingly, it is of no moment whether the deed records provided notice of the forgeries at the time Matthews executed the security deed on which Aurora bases its claim; there was simply no title held by Simpson, Matthews, First Magnus Financial Corporation, or any subsequent assignee. Id. Accord, Second Refuge Church &c. v. Lollar, 282 Ga. 721, 726-727 (3) (550 SE2d 128) (2007). The trial court did not err in declaring title to be vested in Veatch, as personal representative of the estate of Raymond Wesley Veatch, Jr., unencumbered by the security deed held by Aurora.
Judgment affirmed. All the Justices concur.
© 2010-12 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
www.StopForeclosureFraud.com
Posted in STOP FORECLOSURE FRAUD
