Oregon Business News-
In a ruling the Oregon Supreme Court will soon review, the Oregon Court of Appeals on July 18 issued a major decision.The case, Niday v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc., et al, held that MERS, when acting as a nominee for a named lender, is not a beneficiary under Oregon law. The practical effect of the holding is that any trust deed naming MERS the beneficiary may not be foreclosed in the name of MERS by the more expedient nonjudicial method.
A little context is in order.
In 1959, to remain competitive for loan dollars, Oregon adopted the Oregon Trust Deed Act to establish trust deeds as a real estate security instrument. For lenders needing to foreclose, the act created a summary, nonjudicial procedure that bypassed the courts and allowed no redemption rights for borrowers. Foreclosure previously was a judicial process taking two years or more to complete; now it could be done in six months with the summary procedure.
Lenders were happy because the time to liquidate a non-performing loan was substantially reduced. Borrowers benefited because there was no right to a deficiency if the debt exceeded the value of the property and borrowers could cure defaults during the foreclosure process by paying only the amount in arrears rather than the full loan balance.
Trust deeds quickly became the favored real estate security instrument.
image: washingtonpost.com
© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
MERS has got a problem because every single government insured mortgage loan in the entire state that been administratively foreclosed that was placed into a Ginnie Mae pool was done illegally, because as the Note are signed endorse Blank are non-negotiable in a court of law because the document is void of who the owner is.
Ginnie Mae by law cannot be on these documents because they by law are not a lender and cannot lend a single red cent or purchase a mortgage loan and they are the one who is suppose to be in physical possession the Blank Note with is blank. Because Ginnie Mae has requested that the endorsement be in blank, now come forward to the court and show when you purchase the Note/debt that you and MERS are claiming you are owned. It cannot be done.
Wells Fargo Bank is servicing ex-Washington Mutual Bank loan where there no a loan that was being service from the Jul 31, 2006 servicing arrangement that legally administratively foreclosed.
Just show me the Note! Checkmate and I would like to thank one of the creators of MERS’s crazy system who told me in Aug 2010 when I first complained of this exact situation, and he said I am a lawyer and your wrong. Well Mr. William Hultman you need to bring what about 10,000 Notes to court that has Ginnie Mae endorsed on what was Blank Note or dig deep into your pocket and pay the penalty for your illegal RICO operation.
Just sitting back wishing I could see MERS having to present 10 or 20 thousand Notes in court. Who pays the fines for a out of business MERS? I guess sent so many lender are so entangle in this RICO operation that they need MERS to be in business because there is no way on earth they can prove that a blank note belongs to a party that not got a financial interest in the loan when MERS is fraudulently creating assignments stating Wells Fargo is the owner of the debt, but a bank cannot product a check, wire, money order, check statement or napkin show anywhere they purchase a single one of 1.3 million government insured loans.
How is there a question where there is $140 billion in mortgage loans that your servicing from a mortgage servicing agreement yet on some day you are simply the owner of $140 billion that you have not paid a dime for! Cmon Man.
All this done by Banks creating and lending fake money.