All across this country, we have courts issuing orders of foreclosure that transfer properties, the physical dirt upon which this county is built, to “The Banks”. Most judges have no idea that “The Banks” have no ownership interest in those properties (hell, most attorneys don’t understand this).
But there is one thing that is absolutely certain in the vast majority of cases…
THE PLAINTIFF NAMED IN A FORECLOSURE LAWSUIT HAS NO OWNERSHIP INTEREST IN THE LOAN THAT IS BEING FORECLOSED UPON
Most likely, FannieMae/FreddieMac/VA, some other quasi-government agency or some shadowy trust figuratively “owns” the property after a foreclosure and title is issued. But the title issued to that purported principal is, in most cases, figurative at best. While title may transfer via judgment or deed to the actual principal entity after the straw party plaintiff concludes the case, the reality is the home then becomes “owned” by whatever foreign government or shadowy tranche purchasing trust actually owns the shares in that trust.
It’s terrifying to know just how many hundreds of thousands of properties all across this country have been transferred, effectively to foreign interests as secured creditors, with no one even bothering to consider what this means.
What we do know is that years ago China stopped buying unsecured Treasury note obligations, and converted their “investment” into the enterprise known as USA into purchasing interests in Fannie/Freddie obligations. They converted from unsecured investment to secured investments in the Dirt called ‘Murica.
Even after all these years I’m still flabbergasted that people in positions of power at the local and state levels don’t stop to consider what this means. It baffles me how judges at the trial level are perfectly content to enter judgments to nominal plaintiffs knowing full well that the Plaintiff has no interest in the actual property. If pressed by good foreclosure defense, especially through discovery, most plaintiffs will admit…
WE HAVE NO INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY…BUT WE REFUSE TO DISCLOSE WHO REALLY OWNS THIS PROPERTY
In far too many cases, inexplicably, trial court judges allow them to get away with this terrifying legal dodge.
Why do “our” courts continue to nurture the dangerous (and incorrect) legal principal that possession of an original note ends all inquiry into whomever actually owns that note…especially in cases where the party in possession of the note admits,
“we’re in possession of the note on behalf of another party but we refuse to disclose who we’re in possession on behalf of and we refuse to provide to the court any proof that this mystery principal has actually provided us any agency authority”?
This is sheer, incomprehensible madness. Courts all across this country are turning America over to Plaintiffs knowing full well that the identity of the true and rightful owner of the property is being concealed.
I’m sure nothing is wrong with this.
