Skip to main content
Foreclosure Defense Florida

FORECLOSURE COCKROACHES- Jack Booted Lender Thugs That Break Into Homes- IT’S A CRIME!

This morning, as everyday Americans are sitting in their homes or folks are enjoying their first cup of coffee at work, teams of Foreclosure Cockroaches hired by banks and lenders are gassing up their pickup trucks and preparing to make their rounds.   They have lists of properties….maybe your property…that have been provided to them by banks.   Their instructions from the lenders are to go out and “inspect” or “winterize” the properties.   These Foreclosure Cockroaches


Tell you what though, let’s let them slide with the ability to walk onto property and make an unobtrusive visual inspection…no harm there. The real problem comes when they go above and beyond what is reasonable…and they are quite often going way, way, way above and beyond what we should accept as reasonable in a country where property rights….and homestead/castle rights are supposed to be respected.

Despite hundreds of years of common, statutory and Constitutional law that make it explicitly clear that a “Man/Woman’s Home is His Castle”, this bedrock principle is being bulldozed over by lenders across the State of Florida and nationally.


The reason I call them Foreclosure Cockroaches is because they are so hard to find…they scurry away whenever approached and we cannot find out who they are or what they are doing.   I have several cases from across the state. I am in dialogue with high ranking officers in one law enforcement department in this state who are not convinced this is a crime. (Despite the fact that their own State’s Attorney’s Office is.) Please help me gather and share information about this phenomena.   Please post your stories on this blog…please share dates, times, addresses and names of people, lenders, companies that are involved.

Let’s shine a light on these cockroaches.   This sticker posted on the door of an American’s castle should not be grounds to tear up the Constitution, trample the flag, break down the doors in homes across this county and divest ame


  • I remember the first time I had this issue arise in one of my mediations…everybody, including the the plaintiff’s lawyer, was astounded to hear that the bank had sent somebody by a residential homestead and changed the locks while the homeowner was at work.

    The homeowner never even bothered to inform his lawyer because he assumed that the bank had a right to do it. That homeowner had to break a window to enter his own home. I questioned the bank about it and the bank admitted to doing it all the time and claimed that it has a right to protect their security asset, meanwhile the banks own lawyer disagreed. The homeowner’s lawyer called local law enforecement and was informed that it was not trespass.

    It’s just gets weirder and weirder!

  • J.C. says:

    In reference to the Non Resident Cost Bond being filed by the plaintiff’s attorneys upon request from defendants, to satisfy F.S. 57.01; as I understand it, this is supposed to be a surety bond to be issued by an insurance or bonding company. These bonds are classified as high risk and require personal financial statements as well as 100% collateral from the plaintiff.

    The ” bonds” being recorded by the plaintiff’s lawyers all over Florida clerk of courts, seem to be no more than an indemnification letter with the lawyers signing as a surety for the plaintiff.

    The actual BOND is not being recorded, which leads me to believe that they do not exist and the plaintiff’s lawyers are just putting up a smoke screen, because defendants do not understand what the bond is, they do not know what they look like or they do not recognize that it should be some sort of ” insurance policy” I’m I understanding that correctly?

    I found this in the Florida Bar website:

    Originally issued May 29, 1970

    Revised April 23, 1993
    It is not permissible for an attorney to give a letter of indemnification to a bonding company on behalf of an out-of-state plaintiff when the terms of the proposed indemnification agreement require the attorney to reimburse the surety only after the plaintiff has failed to do so. There is no ethical distinction between an attorney’s becoming surety on his client’s possible obligation to an opposing litigant and his becoming surety on the same possible obligation to a surety company which has become surety on the client’s cost bond.

    RPC: 4-1.8(e)
    Statutes: F.S. § 57.011, 454.20
    Rule: Fla.R.Jud.Admin. 2.060(f)

    A member of The Florida Bar states that he frequently represents out-of-state clients and on many occasions is requested by defendants’ attorneys to file cost bonds pursuant to Section 57.011, Florida Statutes. He further states that a local bonding company has agreed to issue nonresident plaintiff cost bonds upon the attorney’s request, provided that, as attorney for plaintiff, he signs a letter of indemnification agreeing to indemnify that surety for any losses if the plaintiff fails to do so.

    We are asked whether the proposed arrangement is permissible under the Rules of Professional Conduct.

    Under Florida law an attorney cannot become a surety on any bond of his client in any judicial proceeding. Section 454.20, Florida Statutes; Rule 2.060(f), Florida Rules of Judicial Administration. Whether the conduct proposed by the inquiring attorney violates either the cited statute or rule is a question of law and hence beyond jurisdiction of this committee. However, the Committee is of the opinion that there is no ethical distinction between an attorney’s becoming surety on his client’s possible obligation to an opposing litigant and his becoming surety on the same possible obligation to a surety company which has become surety on the client’s cost bond. In either case, the attorney is acting as surety for his client. The proposed scheme would, it seems, constitute an attempt to do indirectly that which the attorney is prohibited from doing directly.

    Moreover, the giving of a letter of indemnification by the attorney seems to go beyond the permissible limits of Rule 4-1.8(e), as the terms of the proposed indemnification agreement require the attorney to reimburse the surety only after the plaintiff has failed to do so.

    Any light you can shed on this?

    Thanks for all the work you are doing.

  • Amadou Wane says:

    They have done it to two of my properties; one in Tampa and one in St. Pete. I called the police when it happened the first time. The cop simply said that is is a civil matter. I was really surprise by their response. I called a locksmith the next morning to change the lock and file a temporary restraining order against the pretender lender.
    When it happened the second time, I did not bother to call the cops. I just changed back the locks.
    If this was done by a natural person, I bet the person would be in jail by now. For some reason corporations seems to have more rooms to break the law.

  • J.R. Homeowner says:

    I just had a cockroach vist me yesterday, not even 2 HOURS after having beeen served Lis Pendens on my residence! This guy boldly walked into my entryway courtyard and attached an envelope to my screen door and proceeded to take photographs, even photographing my wife and myself as we came to the door! When I confronted him he claimed to be a “private inspector” hired by the bank to verify if the property was deserted or not. When I asked *what* bank, he claimed to not know and said “look in the envelope”!
    My front door *and * garage doors were open, cars parked in the driveway, lights on, dogs barking and music playing…all clearly visible and audible from the street.
    I am filing a complaint with the Sheriffs Department.
    The cockroach said that he would be back “a coupe of times a month”. I WILL get photographs of him, his vehicle and his license plate if he returns. I WILL forceably eject him from my property if he attempts to come on it again.
    My wife and I are now afraid to leave our home for any length of time after learning of these stories of locks being changed, or this CRIMINAL possibly breaking and entering our home!
    This is HARRASSMENT by the bank, pure and simple!

  • J.R. Homeowner says:

    To add to my previous comment;
    Upon inspection of the envelope left on my door by the cockroach, I discovered that it did NOT contain the name of any “bank”, but instead contained instructions for me to contact AHMSI, (the mortgage servicing company).
    The plaintiff on the foreclosure Lis Pendens service is…you guessed it…Deutsche Bank!

  • M.R. Homeowners says:

    I am a victim of the fraud in Court and presently suffering for the way the foreclosure procedure has been conducted in our case which is horror and extremely painful.
    I am 65 years of age. Since 2008 I have been fighting this foreclosure with my husband, but unfortunately our house was sold on April 8th, 2010. The Judge in Circuit Ninth Orange County Orlando, deffinitely refused to accept that FDLG was lying as well as JPMChase. The Judge’s only concern was that we were living rent free, despite the fact that there is not a single piece of evidence in the complaint. The Judge didn’t care about missing assignments, etc. He didn’t care that I qualified for a Reverse Mortgage due to my age and equity in the house. The Judge didn’t care that my husband is a veteran with a delicate heart condition, two heart attacks and two heart surgeries, diabetic and mental treatment. The Judge didn’t care that Bank declined all our offers of payment in full, and he didn’t care that we lost the car and filed Chapter 7 discharged on Dec. 2008.
    The judge humilliated me in front of other people during our last hearing indicating that he was not going to tolerate anymore that I keep living free and taking advantage of the Bank losses. The Judge was so mad at us that he practically has punished us taking advantage of all his power. He denied all our motions, even a request to waive bond during our appeal, which he refused and denied as well, requiring us to find a bond for $105,000 plus $15,000 attorneys fees.
    Our house was sold on February 22nd, and on April 8th we were evicted. I just have no words to explain the pain, confusion, madness, fear, just a mixture of adverse reactions a human can have.
    We were thrown out to the street with no car , little money and all of my art work, materials, equipment, just everything left inside and lost.
    The buyers gave us $1,400 to find a tentative place to live. We are being deprived to continue selling our work. This is like being sentenced for a crime we never comitted.
    Today we are in a little room with a computer, still fighting in Court, pending appeal (case is still open) and a discharge injunction in the Bankruptcy Court with an evidentiary hearing scheduled next May 13th. We have a very good case in both the appeal, but better yet in the bankruptcy discharged injunction. Of course, we cannot afford an attorney, so we are ProSe.
    We called every single agency in Orlando Florida, Fla. Bar, Orange County Bar, Legal Aid Soc. Seniors First, Senior alliance, Legal Community, The legislators, senators, etc. etc. etc. and no one, had a single idea on how to help us get at leat a part time legal counseling from a pro bono.
    Today, a neighbor just called to inform that all our personal items are out in the street in a huge garage sale, with a sign that says, ” State Garage Sale” Our neighbor went into the house and told us that it was a mess, destroyed and looking vandalized. To my knowledge, this is stolen property. This broke my heart, it is terrible, just terrible.I am just running out of strength, but still with hope.
    I read Matt’s blog every single day and hour. Thank You Matt, you are my inspiration and light of HOPE.
    If any one has some idea, clue, or whatever legal help in contribution to our case, we will deeply appreciate it.
    We have a good case to sue for losses, suffering, fraud, destruction of property and wonder if there is a contingency fee attorney that could take our case.
    Thank You,
    M. R.

Leave a Reply