If you’ve been reading this post for long, you will note that I have been critical of the role MERS or the Mortgage Electronic Registration System is currently playing in the Foreclosure Fraud Fight. The arguments I have are both detailed and esoteric and practical and simple.
Bottom line is I–along with many others– question many of the fundamental legal and practical principles behind MERS’ involvement in the foreclosure process. Thanks to readers like you, this little legal blog has grown to be immensely popular, not just among lawyers and practitioners, but among patriots and advocates of all backgrounds who are standing up to fight against gross abuses that are occurring across this country everyday…the net result of all this information and involvement is a dramatically shifting legal environment that the purveyors of Foreclosure Fraud find themselves fighting in.
No longer do Pretender Lenders or their shameful attorneys walk into court cloaked in the presumption that they are telling the truth….their systemic frauds have stripped them of that unearned privledge.
No longer do most learned and informed judges believe in the veracity of documents submitted to them by the Plaintiffs practicing before them….the depositions of RoboSigners are growing notorious and even if they didn’t read those, the fact that Federal Prosecutors are investigating the places like Lender Processing Services is enough to make any judge stop to consider.
Anywhoo…..I recently received the following post in reply to some of my blogging:
MERSCORP, Inc. (IP: 184.108.40.206 , 220.127.116.11)
E-mail : email@example.com
URL : https://www.mersinc.org
Whois : https://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=18.104.22.168
The rule of law in Kansas still remains that MERS can foreclose or assign the mortgage lien and that when MERS is the mortgagee, the mortgage loan is secured and enforceable. The Landmark National Bank v. Kesler opinion is very limited and only stands for the Kansas Supreme Court not wanting to vacate a final judgment because of the broad discretion given to the trial judge.
As for MERS’ right to foreclose, when a borrower signs the mortgage security instrument at closing, they grant and convey the legal title to the mortgage to Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc. (MERS) and MERS is the mortgagee. As the agent for the promissory note owner, upon instructions from the owner, MERS will commence a foreclosure. The mortgage instrument states that MERS has the right to foreclose and sell the property. Courts around the country have repeatedly upheld and recognized this right.
For all you advocates out there in this fight who wonder whether your voices are being heard…..the fact that MERS found it necessary to respond to my postings and the comments made by all of you who read the posts and who commented should serve as proof positive of the impact you’re all having on this fundamental fight to take back our courts and Fight Foreclosure Fraud. In response to MERS’ comments, I would draw your attention to a recently-published opinion from the United States District Court in Nevada called WEINGARTNER v.CHASE HOME FINANCE, LLC. The full opinion can be found here. The opinion is very technical, but the bottom line is it offers powerful insight into the judicial mindset and legal reasoning that forms the basis to challenge MERS’ involvement in foreclosures across the country.
There is much more to this and many other questions….such as….if MERS’ position as a foreclosing Plaintiff is so secure, why did Fannie Mae just prohibit MERS from acting as a foreclosing Plaintiff? (See memo here)
Next, the Azize opinion here in Florida’s Second District Court of Appeals upheld MERS’ right to foreclose in Florida yet after that opinion, MERS bascially stopped filing foreclosures in their name…..why was that? (Maybe it was the footnote?)