Skip to main content
Foreclosure Defense Florida

We’re Gonna Have a Foreclosure Trial, Simple Thing…..Right?

american-mortgageSo here’s the thing.   A foreclosure trial should be a simple matter.   An easy case for a big shot foreclosure firm”¦.right?   Let’s take a hypothetical example.   The Plaintiff (or some version of the Plaintiff”¦we’ll get to that later) filed the Original Note years ago. They’ve got an Original, wet ink note that was taken out with American Broker’s Conduit in 2007.   The note file with the court in 2009 is endorsed in blank so any old person can come in court, file the lawsuit and throw my client out into the street”¦..right?

Well, hold on there Nellie. Slow down a bit.   Let me take you for a little trip down the rabbit hole.   First a little date to keep in mind.   American Home Mortgage filed for bankruptcy in August 2007, just a few days after my loan was closed.   According to pleadings filed in court, shortly after the filing 6,500 people were fired all across the country.   So a first question I have is just how did my little ole loan get endorsed by some employee of AHMSI in the few short days between when it closed and when AHMSI filed bankruptcy?   (More on that later too.)   You know how things are when the ship is sinking”¦.I’d imagine everyone knew the ship was going down so were all these folks really Johnnie on the Spot and really dotting their i’s and crossing their t’s? I mean while the building was on fire and everyone was running up and down the hallway screaming, was my particular girl sitting there calmly endorsing away millions of dollars in promissory notes?(Stamp, sign; Stamp, sign; Stamp, sign)   I just don’t picture that and, as I’ll get to later, this probably was not happening.

AHMSI and CA case details – GOOD ref-2

AHMSI-1

American Home Mortgage bankruptcy questions and court filing

AHMSI-2

Next, I started carefully examining all these bankruptcy filings and litigation cases related to the AHMSI bankruptcy and it seems there’s real questions about whether and when and what parts of loans of these bankrupt companies actually were transferred out. You see the loans were like pigs that were sent off to slaughterhouses. Pieces and parts were chopped up and sent off to different places”¦the loans themselves were sold off to one group of investors (who knows if they were double sold?), then the rights to service or collect the payments on the loans were either retained by related entities, or those rights were sold off to other companies.   In subsequent lawsuits filed in federal bankruptcy court all sort of allegations are made about the improper transfer of these parts of the pig.

Another key part of this case comes in the name of the Plaintiff that sued my client to foreclose, American Home Mortgage Servicing.   Well, when they first filed the suit in 2009, I didn’t like the way the name was all loose and not pled in a proper legal fashion, so I demanded they give me the details that our pleading rules require”¦.tell me what state of incorporation, tell me you’re in good standing, tell me there are no other competing entities”¦.and well, here we are three years later and it seems like those questions I raised right at the beginning were well founded and justified.   You see, as the litigation shows, there were in fact two versions of AHMSI, pre-bankruptcy and the fire-sale rising from the ashes, post bankruptcy.   I challenged capacity and it seems that challenge was well-taken at the time”¦.but that was never disclosed to me or the court in my case. (More on that later)

Me being a curious type, I sent detailed, painstaking discovery pointed at AHMSI asking all kinds of questions, the who, what, when, where and hows of every aspect of this loan and the litigation”¦and guess what responses I got?   NOTHING.   Not a single question answered.   And how did they pull this trick off?   Well, they went behind my back and told the court in an ex-parte motion that the loan had sold and that AHMSI now had nothing to do with this loan. I objected but the court denied my objection, letting AHMSI slither away not answering a single damn question.   For two years now, I’ve kept pointing back to the fact that I was denied those questions, filing motions to compel, trying to take depositions, but the new plaintiff’s attorneys (same as the old plaintiff’s attorneys) scream that the old plaintiff isn’t their client and they cannot be made to answer any questions.   They maintained this position until right up at the eve of trial when they told the court they were going to call their former client as a witness in order to answer questions and get in information they need in order to prove their case.

Well, along comes another interesting thing about this case.   You see, the Plaintiff’s attorney files a ” Notice of Non-Reliance on Assignment”.   You see, AHMSI had apparently contracted with a company LPS or DOCS, LLC to generate the documents it needs to foreclose.   Now AHMSI and LPS Docs are in a good old fashioned legal war, AHMSI is suing LPS accusing its old friend of doing shady things as part of its document creation operation.   Nothing like a little fratricide to spice my case up a little bit.   Now, I’m not sure what a ” Notice of Non-Reliance” is”¦I checked the rule books and there’s no mention of such a motion in all of legal history, but I wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing out on something new and exciting so I filed a ” Notice of Reliance on Assignment”.   You see, I wanted to bring to the court’s attention the fact that the Plaintiff had produced a document , filed it with the court and were now trying to run away from it like a frat boy runs away from a girl with”¦.well, you fill in the blank.

READ THIS DOCUMENT VERY CAREFULLY

Well, the ” Notice of Non-Reliance“ brings us to another interesting point in this little saga called, ” The Importance of Being Earnest”.   You see, the Florida Bar issued an ethics opinion which dealt with exactly the kind of situation presented here.   How do I know this is the situation.   Well, I just received documents that were sealed as part of the Nevada Attorney General’s Lawsuit against Lender Processing Service.   In this lawsuit is a document that explains exactly how LPS employees are supposed to forge the signatures of other employees, but they don’t call it forgery, they call it ” Surrogate Signing“.   The explain it in great detail”¦really, you just gotta read it here, complete with a picture perfect example of Linda Greene’s signature that everyone is supposed to copy.   It’s just mind blowing that they would make all this so clear and write it down as policy”¦.apparently no one considered that this was called forgery and that if the signature was notarized it was notary fraud.   You see, I in fact have a Linda Greene signature in my case.   Now, as I read the Bar ethics opinion along with the just-released Nevada lawsuit, I believe my opposing counsel has an obligation to bring this directly to the court for consideration”¦.after which I believe the court would have no choice but to dismiss the case and potentially sanction those parties involved. But that hasn’t happened yet.   I’ve asked my friend, the attorney on the other side just when she might make this meeting, but all my pestering emails just get ignored.

Which brings us back to another interesting subject, the promissory note at issue in this case.   I have well founded reason to believe the note at issue in this case was not in fact endorsed by the person whose name appears on the face of the document.   How?   Well, remember the whole picture of the building burning and people running around on fire because 6,500 people are about to get fired in the days just after my loan closed?   That’s certainly part of it, but there’s more.   Much, much more.   The other side knows it and I know it, but they are stuck in some kind of a dangerously delusional world where they think the judge ain’t gonna care about the pleadings I have filed.   Maybe they’re right, maybe the judge will just ignore all of this.

Now, here’s the thing. I can’t just stand up in court and blather on like I can here and make this case.   In court, I can’t just stand up and start making all these wild, accusatory statements and expect the judge to take them into consideration.   Even if the judge wanted to , our rules of procedure require me to go through a painstaking process to make sure the evidence is properly presented and before the court.   And so while it’s just taken me   bit over an hour to tell parts of this story here, preparing then presenting this story in court will take many, many, many hours.   Collecting the evidence, organizing the evidence, then getting it into a form for the court to consider over the screaming objections of my opponents.   This truly sets up as a battle royale.   Will justice prevail?   You just never know until the very last minute.

2 Comments

  • Stupendous Man - Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny says:

    Matt,

    I posted this on face book this morning. I expect it is applicable here.

    “Here is a nice term from Black’s Law Dictionary, 9th, which seems to apply to banks, and counsel, in virtually every foreclosure:

    insane delusion. (1838) An irrational, persistent belief in an imaginary state of facts resulting in a lack of capacity to undertake acts of legal consequence, such as making a will. See CAPACITY(2).

    Black’s Law Dictionary, 6th, offers a slightly different definition:

    insane delusion. An “insane delusion” is a conception of a disordered mind which imagines facts to exist of which there is no evidence and belief in which is adhered to against all evidence and argument to contrary, and which cannot be accounted for on any reasonable hypothesis. In re Nigro’s Estate, 243 Cal.App.2d 152, 52 Cal.Rptr. 128, 133.”

    Sincerely,

    Stupendous Man – Defender of Liberty, Foe of Tyranny

  • Steve says:

    Under the linked citation “AHMSI and CA case details-GOOD ref.2″ page 15 of 17 it touches briefly on the fraud subject, it states,

    ” One need be only an informed citizen to know that on a widespread bases and throughout the country certain unscrupulous mortgage lenders and mortgage brokers did induce unwary individuals to take loans to purchase homes without requiring evidence of employment,income, tax returns, or other means to take out the loan.”

    I wonder why their isn’t more of focus on this portion. My story is exactly the same as Angela’s but only a few months apart. If I’d been able to afford or find a lawyer I think I would’ve added more attention to it. Then again, I’m not a lawyer. Here is some links I hope provide some help to this case. Good luck.

    “SEC Charges Former American Home Mortgage Executives”

    https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-92.htm

    It even points out in article- “American Home Mortgage actually originated the majority of its loans in 2006 on a “stated income” basis without verifying the borrower’s income.”

    Here’s the whole story of the investors class action lawsuit.

    https://securities.stanford.edu/1037/AHM_01/200863_r01c_0701898.pdf

    I’m guessing both these suits were settled out of court admitting no guilt. I think this why we need the criminal charges.

Leave a Reply