Foreclosure Defense Florida

Ibanez- Mortgages and Pensions, Federalism and Class War

Follow the link below for commentary on some of the meaning behind Ibanez and the larger battle….the thing that is so mind boggling about all of this is that there are real people in power and decision makers who believe all of this can just be pushed under some very big rug…..

Last week the Massachusetts Supreme Court dealt the latest legal blow to the banksters’ fraudulent foreclosure and MBS system. The Ibanez case found that the standard bank practice of vaguely claiming that a set of mortgage transfers took place (e.g. by declaring  a loan to be part of a  pooling and servicing agreement without establishing the entire chain of title prior to the loan’s reaching the trust)  does not establish standing to foreclose. The court, like the Land Court before it,  found that US  Bancorp and Wells Fargo could not establish ownership  of the lien and thus could not foreclose on the properties in question.
The case  dealt  only  with  standing to foreclose and did not directly impugn the  legitimacy of the MBS  trusts or how NY trust law, the law under which almost all securitizations are done (according to Yves Smith of Naked Capitalism), would view these inadequately documented trust assignments.
This is the latest of a string of state and federal decisions finding that wherever homeowners challenge the entities who seek to foreclose, they’re likely to find that they can’t prove they own the note and/or, in this case, the lien. It’s clear that the entire structure of debt-based land ownership is in limbo, and that no one will ever be able to figure out who has the right to foreclose upon whom. This slow but steady flow of court decisions represents the last  embers of law and order which still exist anywhere on this desolated civil horizon. Florida’s Rocket Docket is the  barbaric, might-makes-right  alternative which the system will certainly try to impose wherever it can. In that case, the response of the Noble Savage, if he actually exists, would be to reject the land-debt  system completely and take back the land in restitution as from a criminal, and in redemption as from a foreign invader. Neither of those are metaphors.

Leave a Reply