Or, stated another way,
The banks and their foreclosure mills are cheating, and foreclosures should stop until the courts and other state agencies wrapped their hands around the full magnitude of the cheating.
In my foreclosure files, I’ve found a pattern of conduct, potentially criminal conduct, in approximately 20% of the foreclosure cases I’m defending.
In every case where I’ve brought this issue before a judge, the judge has agreed or the plaintiff has agreed and attempted to cover up their wrongdoing before it’s brought before the court.
If any party comes before a court, raises his right hand and boldly and directly proclaims:
Your Honor, I’ve Committed A Crime, And I Swear This Under Penalties Of Perjury
Can a judge simply ignore this admission? As Article V officers, sworn to uphold both the Laws of General Application and The Constitution of The State of Florida, the clear answer is:
No, Judges Must Respond to Violations of All Law And Ensure That The Interests of The State Generally Are Protected Even When Those Violations Are Not Explicitly Framed By The Controversy Before The Court.
Put another way, when litigants appear before an Article V court officer and that officer discovers violations of fundamental law, violations that impair a clearly defined state interest, then such officers have a duty and obligation to prosecute the matters sua sponte as a direct consequence of their obligations under Article V.
Why aren’t the judges doing anything about this foreclosure fraud?
Did anyone look into when Countrywide started Recontrust (the foreclosure dept) it actually stood for “Con” or “trick” the trust AGAIN IN OTHER WORDS “RE” “CON” THE “TRUST” “Recontrust”. This is now owned and operated by Bank of America. Why hasn’t anyone looked into the amount of fraud in these securities and amount of fraud in foreclosures?
Spill the beans Matt…
A client of mine received a $1000.00 check form the Independent Foreclosure Review people. She lost her house in a summary judgment motion and the appeal is pending.
Quite frankly do not know how to advise the woman. Although the mailing states she will not waive any rights by cashing the check, we are still in the appellate process. Yet $1000.00 to someone who may lose their home is a lot of money. This is awful.
A $200,000.00 home is stolen and the criminal only has to pay $1000.00 restitution. Unbelievable.
welcome to amerika