We’re all like scientists cracking a very complex code.  Now, too many people get involved with loan audits or securitization reviews THAT HAVE ZERO VALUE.  ZERO VALUE. ZERO VALUE.

One thing everyone must keep in mind is that if whomever does an “audit” (whatever the heck that means) cannot be qualified as an expert in a court of law, THE AUDIT HAS ZERO VALUE.  The court will not consider one single word on the page.  So for everyone out there selling audits and for everyone out there thinking about using any of this garbage, you must ask whether the report can be qualified as an expert.

The one person I am aware of who has been qualified as an expert is Lynn Syzmoniak..and she has had  to fight like heck….

FRAUD DIGEST

I’ve been receiving and sharing excellent information and thoughts that have been shared with me by pro se litigants…there are some very bright people out there that are raising some very good questions.  In most of my litigation cases, we’re still stuck trying to get the very basic information out of the Plaintiffs–haven’t even moved into substantive discovery in most cases.

On a percentage basis, something like 80% of my cases have failed at the MTD stage because the Plaintiffs are unable or unwilling to substantiate the most basic information.  I anxiously await the far off time when we might plumb the real depths of the garbage filed in our courts to see what real mischief has been created….but read this below and think about what it means if this pro-se guy is correct.  How many millions of dollars have been transferred into trusts that no one has any idea whatsoever who owns/controls or operates?  Has there ever been a time in American jurisprudence where such massive amounts of wealth have been transferred with no evidentiary basis to support the transfers?

WHAT’S THE POINT OF COURTS AND LAWS AND STATUES AND RULES IF THEY’RE ALL

WANTONLY IGNORED?

In my case the alleged trust is identified in the complaint as being “Soundview Home Loan Trust 2005-OPT4″ (Sounview). In documents filed with the SEC Soundview holds itself out to be registered/incorporated in the state of Delaware, and this within numerous of the SEC documents. In the fall of 2008 I made a request to the Delaware SOS and received a statement from that office stating Soundview does not exist. I made another request in February of 2010 and received a similar statement which says, in pertinent part:

“…a thorough search of the statutory trust records…indicate the “Soundview Home Loan Trust 2005-OPT4″, is not the title of a Delaware statutory trust or foreign statutory trust. And I do hereby further certify that the records of this office fail to show that a statutory trust of the above title has ever filed a certificate of trust in this department.”

In addition to searching the Delaware SOS records I’ve also done an online search for same in New York (the most likely alternative state of registration/incorporation). New York currently has no record of Soundview.

I have reviewed the Delaware statutes relating to both domestic and foreign trusts. It appears, in my laymans interpretation, that all statutory trusts must be registered. Such is found in: http://delcode.delaware.gov/title12/c038/index.shtml

So it seems I have been sued by, not only a currently nonexistent entity, but a never existent entity. Is it possible for a non, or never, existent entity to maintain a lawsuit? Is there a requirement that MBS trusts must be registered?

I’ve wanted to make some hay out of this but have been unable to determine if there is any hay to be made. Can you shed some light on this for me?