Washington (state): Bradburn v ReconTrust; Bank of America – won using the Constitution.
As a follow-up to the judge’s commentary “. . . under what authority did MERS have the right to name that trustee?” – what authority indeed.
Read the Motion for [Partial] Summary Judgment, Opposition and Reply to understand how Scott Stafne, Esq., attorney for Bradburn, used the Constitution and powerful, straightforward language to prevail in this case:
“This Court should grant Mr. Bradbum a partial summary judgment that ReconTrust, clothed by defendants BANA [Bank of America] and Fannie Mae, misused the immense power granted under the DTA [Deed of Trust Act] and through their actions caused Bradbum damages by wrongfully “stealing” Bradbum’s home in violation of the aforementioned provisions of the DTA, and that defendants are liable for such damages as a jury determines. Further, this Court should grant Mr. Bradbum a partial summary judgment that defendants misuse of the DTA and related robosigning practices constituted violations of the CPA [Consumer Protection Act] for which defendants are liable.”
In attorney Scott Stafne’s Reply to ReconTrust’s Opposition:
“. . . Default is not a defense to unlawful use of non-judicial foreclosure. If the Defendants could have lawfully foreclosed then they should have done so. Further, unlawful foreclosure, not default, has unlawfully deprived Bradburn of use and enjoyment of the property. . .”
Excellent reading folks – read and learn.
Bradburn v BOA Reply to MSJ OPP
© 2010-19 FORECLOSURE FRAUD | by DinSFLA. All rights reserved.
Here is the deal and that is the OCC allowed this to take place where they knew people were being wrongly foreclosed due to these tactics as Sen Warren has written to them, but the regulator is so corrupt, I don’t knew if it can be ever again trusted. This should have been resolve under the Independent (wink wink) Foreclosure Review Board settlement Jan 2013.
However as the “No Standing” provision was taken out, victims has to go to court as in this case and get it resolved, when in fact a crime was committed and the OCC was not referring these crime over to law enforcement as Sen Warren question the OCC about.
The Federal Reserve Bank also in that same agreement was in violation of the law by not referring over these crimes!
Additionally to Charles Reeds comment, the Wink Wink Independent Review, the ReconTrust consent order throwing them out of Washington state and the complaint by the AG Rob McKenna are all a very bad joke. The unlawfully foreclosed properties should have all been returned to the homeowners without the cost and undue stress of litigation. As McKenna had said in the complaint but did not do. Our politicians have breached their duties to their constituents. The vulnerable are being preyed upon while the few have the means to stand up and fight in the courtrooms, should have all been protected from this crime. ReconTrust and MERS and the frauds have been stealing houses while non of the above consent orders and settlements have meant squat! A shame on our politicians!
Thank God above Scott Stafne is protecting the innocent. And thanks beyond words to this judge whom sees the crime and the truth and rules by the rule of law. God Bless both of them.
He did an interview yesterday about it. He mentions what it means for those in non-judicial foreclosure states.
It won’t let me put the link in. but go to youtube and search “Attorney Stafne, Who Won Huge ruling in Washington against MERS.
Or go to sherriequestioningall.blogspot.com to see the interview there.
How do we get the case ruling on all 41 case Stafne won on non judicial being unlawful …please send to (p.rose12q@gmail.com)