It’s too early on a Sunday to get all worked up, but the quote is just amazing….

MITTENS SPEAKS

Hat tip to Nye Lavalle and Jackie Mack!

In my mind, JPMorgan ranks among the very top of the most aggressive and abusive litigators in the whole fraudclosure arena.  They surround themselves with monster paid lawyers then attack the whistleblowers and those who dare to challenge with the ferocity of an out of control criminal street gang.

And so I love seeing them get a few shots thrown back their direction.

Understand, the position we are in around this nation is the banks do whatever they want. They engage in whatever abusive and violent and bullying conduct they care to, then they just cloak themselves behind the highest priced lawyers and navigate their way through whatever court system they need to in order to walk away with no consequence.

In this case and so many others, you see them slithering and bashing and beating a homeowner in a federal case.  I’ve read pleadings after pleadings and the legal position they assert is,

SCREW YOU AMERICAN TAXPAYER, WE OWN THESE LAWS, WE DO WHAT WE WANT

(and then just as a kicker they throw in)

AND WE’RE COMING AFTER THE CONSUMER LAWYERS WHO DARED TO CHALLENGE US

But one judge dared to keep the scales of justice balanced equally, a quite extraordinary fact, frankly. Read the opinion:

Defendants, JP Morgan Chase & Co., a foreign corporation, JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A., individually and as successor to (collectively “Chase”), Washington Mutual
Bank, a dissolved federal bank (“WaMu”), and Federal National Mortgage Corporation, a
federally-chartered corporation (“FNMA”), (collectively, the “Defendants”), pursuant to
Rule 12(b)(6), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure, move to dismiss Plaintiff’s First
Amended Complaint. Defendants seek dismissal on grounds that (1) Plaintiff waived her
claims by failing to assert them in a 2006 mortgage foreclosure case; (2) Plaintiff fails to
state any causes of action in the various counts of the First Amended Complaint inasmuch
as she fails to differentiate among Defendants in her allegations; (3) Count I fails to state
a cause of action because the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act
(“FDUTPA”), section 501.201, et seq., Florida Statutes, does not apply to Defendants; (4)
Count II fails to state a cause of action because Defendants are not debt collectors as
defined by the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (“FDCPA”) and initiating a mortgage
foreclosure action does not constitute a debt collection; (5) Plaintiff fails to state a claim
under the Florida Consumer Collection Practices Act (“FCCPA”), section 559.72, Florida
Statutes, in Count II; (6) Plaintiff fails to state a cause of action for civil conspiracy in
Count III; (7) Plaintiff failed to state a cause of action for abuse of legal process in Count
IV; and (8) Count V, alleging violations of the RICO statute,18 U.S.C. § 1962, fails to
state a cause of action.

With respect to the asserted waiver of Plaintiff’s claims for her failure to assert
them in the 2006 foreclosure case, the Court is not convinced, at this stage of the
proceedings, that Plaintiff waived her claims because the complaint includes allegations
based on conduct that occurred after her alleged breach of the mortgage loan agreement.
She asserts that the facts supporting her claims were not brought to light until revelations
of fraud in the mortgage industry began to unfold in the fall of 2010. Additionally, the
Court cannot base a dismissal on matters outside the four corners of the complaint. See
Milburn v. United States, 734 F.2d 762, 765 (11th Cir. 1984). While JPMC claims it is
not liable for any conduct of WaMu that occurred prior to September 25, 2008, the date
on which the Purchase and Assumption Agreement (“PAA”) was executed between
JPMC and WaMu, the PAA has not even been filed with the Court. Furthermore,
Plaintiff asserts that her claims against Defendant JPMC are predicated on its alleged
servicing of the loan, conduct that occurred after September 25, 2008.
Defendants claim exemption from FDUTPA as banking corporations regulated by
a federal agency; however, application of the exemption cannot be determined with
certainty from the four corners of the First Amended Complaint. The Court is not
convinced that the exemption would apply to Defendants who, as Plaintiff alleges, acted
as loan servicers, and the exemption clearly would not apply to non-banks such as
JPMCC and FNMA. Also, although Defendants assert that they are not “debt collectors”
within the meaning of the FDCPA because they were not attempting to collect a debt due
another, there remains a question of fact as to whether 15 U.S.C. § 1692(f) applies to
activities by JPMCC, JPMC, WaMu, and FNMA, as alleged by Plaintiff, to enforce a
security interest via mortgage foreclosure. See 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(6).
Questions of fact preclude dismissal of Plaintiff’s FCCPA claim as well, because
she plainly alleges that Defendants knew they did not have the legal right to collect the
alleged debt and knew that Plaintiff was not in default. See Fla. Stat § 559.72(9).
Likewise, Plaintiff is able to overcome dismissal of her common law claims for civil
conspiracy and abuse of process through her factual allegations that Defendants acted
unlawfully, and in agreement, with the intent to defraud her through the use of sham
documents and fabricated evidence, and that their actions caused her damages. Finally,
her civil RICO claims under 18 U.S.C. § 1962 adequately allege facts, at least for this
stage of the proceedings, to support each of the statutory elements for the predicate acts
that allegedly divested her of her homestead. Plaintiff is able to avoid the time-bar of her
civil RICO claim inasmuch as she alleges she was prevented from discovering that she
was the victim of fraud by Defendants’ concealment of the alleged fraud.

JACKIEmACK

They say a picture is worth a thousand words.  Well, maybe pictures will succeed where millions of words have failed.  Foreclosure defense attorneys and human beings who are suffering have poured their words out in pleadings filed with the courts all across this country, but the courts have ignored their words.  A defendant’s words are ignored and they are thrown into the street.  Families and children and senior citizens thrown into the street while the very same homes they’re thrown out of sit vacant, abandoned, abused, vandalized, made dangerous.

The banks have likewise poured their words out as well.

Fraudulent words, forged words, untrue words.  Printed and signed and sworn to and notarized under PENALTIES OF PERJURY on Assignments and Affidavits and legal pleadings and sworn statements filed in courtrooms all across this country. But their evil words, their lies, their desecrations of a once just legal system are accepted and consecrated by this legal system that has turned its back on the people it was created to protect.

Which of course begs the question,

“Are there in fact any PENALTIES OF PERJURY in this lawless nation any longer?”

Not from where I sit.  Jamie Dimon still flies high and free and proud. Blankfeld too. And John Corzine, they all sit high and mighty and live quite well, thank you very much.

But there are in fact profound and devastating consequences for all their lies and their conduct down here at the ground level, on the front lines of this war.  I see it in the faces of my clients and in the faces and the eyes of all those hapless and hopeless people who sit in courtroom benches waiting for what passes as “justice” in this evil age.

I stared back at these faces the other morning as one of Florida’s Foreclosure Rocket Dockets initiated and was ready to take off again the other morning.  Hundreds of families thrown out into the street, the judge sitting in his black robe while a foreclosure mill worked in perfect synchrony to throw these families, these human pieces of detritus into the judicial wood chipper.

Bank Lawyer: Foreclosure

Judge: 120 Sale Date

Homeowner: Um, Ok Judge if you say so.

No evidence. No review. No consideration of forged assignments or forged notes or no evidence or anything for that matter. Not a single thought that maybe, just maybe our nation’s legal system had some scintilla of an obligation to police, some duty to protect this unwashed sea of humanity from the tyranny that is wrought upon this land.  Just human beings thrown to the wolves, thrown out into the streets. Every unchecked judgment a victory for the banks, every judgment a human carcass thrown onto the inferno of injustice that rages across this nation.

My heart sunk when I watched the Florida Supreme Court’s Pino v. Bank of NY arguments.  I know these justices have not seen what we see every day.  Oh how I wish they would strip away the robes, those glorious robes and wear the uniform of today’s American.  What an experience it would be for one justice, two justice, three justice, four to travel the state anonymously playing the role of one of those they swore an oath to protect and defend.  Oh what an experiment in real liberty and justice if they came dressed in dirty denim to see how the court system they control now functions.  What would they think as Sheriffs barred their entry into supposedly open courtrooms?  Would they perceive courtrooms are fair and equitable when the banks are camped out, set up, comfortable and organized, streamlined, their papers pre-prepared, handed to the judge while they take the judge’s stamp and KERCHUNK, KERCHUNK, KERCHUNK, stamp out orders.  What would they think of foreclosure “trials” where no evidence is presented at all, only papers, prepared by the banks, then blessed by the judge.  Kiss the ring.  How can “our” justices judge if they have not had this experience?  How can the perception and perspective be balanced if their connection to our state’s legal system is predominated by thousand dollar fundraisers sponsored by the nation’s banking elite?

It cannot.

But again, these words fail.

Perhaps these pictures might capture the story better. (here)

Bank of America, along with all the other banks are pushing our courts to throw America taxpayers out into the street…why? Part of the reason is they want to collect the easy money they get from the federal government….(that’s you and me the taxpayer by the way) another part of the reason is they want to sit on the homes and leave them dilapidating into states of disrepair.

An elderly couple, who worked their entire lives and who operated a small machine shop, were chased out of this perfectly fine home about three years ago.

The home has sat vacant and abandoned, with no power on for years. The attorneys handling the foreclosure had no authorization to entertain any purchase price…not any price…and when the home finally went up for foreclosure auction six months ago, Bank of America would only accept the full judgment price….nearly $200,000.  Cash buyers were prepared to pay the fair market value for the home, but the bank would not accept any price….instead they let it conclude with a foreclosure sale.

I keep watching it, wondering when a realtor might put a sign in the yard, wondering when some family might move in, but six months later and there’s not even a sign.

And so the home just sits, untold tens of thousands more, vacant and abandoned, rotting away more and more each day.

Oh sure, a property preservation company comes by every two weeks.  They pull a neat trick where they mow one strip of the grass so they can take the picture, submit that to Bank of America who in turn bills Fannie Mae for mowing the entire yard. (Incidentally, that’s you and I paying to cut an entire yard when in fact only a few fraudulent strips of grass are snipped.)

This is what your country has become.  We use state and federal taxpayer dollars to throw the poor and old people out into the streets so that the banks can collect still more federal dollars when they have them thrown out onto the streets.  Then we pay the banks and their property preservation companies to not do the maintenance work.

At some point in time, one of the maintenance companies will get around to submitting all kinds of false bids to do construction work that is not required, but they will contract for that work and they might actually do that work.  They won’t be licensed and all of that are criminal violations, but no one cares to hold anyone accountable for that either….

No one is in jail and no one cares to do anything at all about this.

And the elderly couple that left in shame?  Well, they are devastated, destroyed, beaten down and embarrassed. We did this to them. We destroyed this couple.

Every single one of us played our part.

Let’s all thank ourselves for the part we each played in their destruction.

I don’t have a court reporter at every hearing and I don’t order every court transcript, but sometimes you leave a hearing wondering…..

What? Why? Huh? What Just Happened In There?

The procedural posture of this case is clear…I got the case dismissed. And after you get an adverse ruling you’ve only got ten days to rehear or 30 days to appeal……that’s it. And so I’m really scratching my head about why this Plaintiff want to keep this dead case alive….

But I don’t let it drive me crazy…maybe I’ll let them get a Final Judgment of Foreclosure….on a case where the court lost jurisdiction in November 2011….but just read this transcript…..

And let me know what you think…..

MR. WEIDNER: Yes, sir.
2 THE COURT: It says, The action is dismissed
3 without prejudice. Motion is granted.
4 You’re going to write this on there, then, all
5 right? The Plaintiff –
6 MR. WEIDNER: Are we giving them another shot
7 at it, the fifth?
8 THE COURT: Yes. They are getting ten days.
9 They’re getting ten days to do it. I’m sorry.
10 That’s the rule. You said it’s dismissed without
11 prejudice.
12 MR. WEIDNER: Right. So that just means that
13 they get to refile the case. The action is the
14 case. They failed to comply with the Court’s
15 ruling. The only basis for the Court –
16 THE COURT: This matter wasn’t supposed to be
17 in front of me so I’m letting them do it. Okay?
18 I’m going to let them do the rehearing and then
19 we’ll hear it.
20 MR. WEIDNER: This is — will be the, I’ve
21 lost count of the number of rehearings.

BAC Home Loans v. Farmer, Jr. 050112 Hearing

It just never stops with these guys.  You can change a name, but the leopard doesn’t lose his spots…

And still Florida’s Attorney General does nothing.

I particularly like the revelation from Ron Wolfe that he feels Florida Default will be vindicated, he’s confident there will be no consequence.  Well, listen to the latest complaints:

WFTV’s 9 Investigates looked into serious concerns about one of the biggest foreclosure law firms in the state.

If the bank has foreclosed on your property or you were the tenant in a foreclosure, chances are you’ve heard of the Florida Default Law Group.

But now, investigative reporter George Spencer has uncovered hundreds of complaints and a major state investigation.

FLORIDA DEFAULT INVESTIGATIONS