Foreclosure Defense Florida

When Are Countrywide Notes Endorsed? A Filing in A Federal Case Shows the Problems With Negotiability.

When exactly are promissory notes endorsed?   When did the Plaintiff come to perfect his cause of action to foreclose?   These were key questions in yesterday’s transcript of a court proceeding.   When the judge referred to “673”, he was referring to the Uniform Commercial Code which is found in Chapter 673, Florida Statutes.   He has picked up on that fact that “673” and the rules of negotiability are critical components in this whole fraudclosure hurricane.   Importantly, so has Florida’s Second District Court of Appeals…..it’s widely known that the Second is a very, very astute, academic and profoundly perceptive court.   They’ve weighed in on a whole host of fraudclosure opinions and the opinions are tight and profound….

The sole basis upon which hundreds of millions of dollars in real wealth and millions of acres of property are being transferred from one party to another in this country are squiggly lines and stamps which purport to endorse the promissory notes a issue in millions of foreclosure cases pending all across this country.

In most cases, the notes were not intended by the loan servicers, depositors or mortgage backed security trustee to be transferred via endorsement alone. How do I know this?   It says so right in the terms of the applicable Pooling and Servicing Agreement.   The individual PSAs are the Constitution that governs the rights, responsibilities and relationships among the myriad parties in a typical mortgage loan.   These documents were supposed to be followed by all the parties, but in the vast majority of cases they are just ignored by all parties and now by the courts.   But they should not be ignored.   The PSAs are the real source of guidance and direction in a world gone mad.   The fact that we are all allowing them to be ignored with the constant mantra that, “you’re not a party to the agreement” and “the mortgage follows the note” is a failing on the part of the defense bar for not making it an issue in every case.

I recently stumbled upon a filing in a federal court case that’s pending in Southern Mississippi.   I’ve got deep roots in Southern Mississippi, and frankly some great legal scholarship in consumer rights comes out of that area.   I was following up on the bombshell federal litigation where Mississippi workers realized the money they had placed with big shot Yankee investors is um…well, a little squirrely, when I came across this fascinating case.   But first, we would all do well to understand the Public Employee Retirement System of Mississippi lawsuit.   It is alleged that Goldman Sachs misrepresented the quality of hundreds of millions of dollars in loans that were sold to these retirees.   Goldman said they were solid gold, it turns out they were garbage.   Mississippi said they were defrauded, Goldman says you shouldn’t expect our marketing, sales and investment material to be truthful, too bad your retirees lost their pension checks, screw you, we’re Goldman.

Now, what’s important to keep in mind is this is just one institutional investor who was smart enough to catch this.   The allegations contained in this litigation could and should be being made in lawsuits all across this country….NEWSFLASH: ALL YOU RETIREES AND PEOPLE THAT THINK YOUR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE PENSIONS ARE SAFE…..REMEMBER THE OLD STORY, “THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES”

Anywhoo, back to the story the question about how billions of dollars in notes gets transferred should be on everyone’s mind.   Our nation has been hijacked by the reckless and out of control banking system with their sloppiness, lies, smoke and mirrors and misrepresentations. And now they have thoroughly polluted our court systems.   But some judges are fighting back.   They are pulling back the curtain, not willing to be blown off or glossed over by slick lawyers who want to dust them off, distract them and suggest they should   ignore fundamental legal principles.

The fate of this nation rests in the ability of good judges and a strong legal system to defend and protect this nation from the looming regime, the banking cabal, that has hijacked the whole of the United States   government.

Read these deposition transcripts carefully, can you spot the critical legal issues that are spawned here? Can you figger out who the who in whoville is?

Consider the impact of this in all Countrywide cases…

Sjolander

 

5 Comments

  • Raptor says:

    If I read this correctly, the person whose name is on the endorsement is not the person who put it there. Hmmm…and apparently it was employees of Recontrust who stamped notes for Countrywide/BoA. Is that even legal? What is with this “power of attorney” that’s being referred to? Very interesting…this does smack of a sort of “robo-endorsing”…

  • SandyLynn Timms says:

    Matt, is it possible to get a link to the full transcript? This link left out pages I would like to see, particularly about Fannie Mae. I have a trial in a few weeks and a second copy of the note has the stamped endorsements discussed in this transcript. Thanks.

  • Linda Castellano says:

    Matt, I would also like to obtain the full transcript of Michele Sjolander’s deposition. It would be really important to my case, How can I obtain that transcript? Thanks

  • Ginger says:

    How can the double stamp be accepted when the UCC states this:

    U.C.C. § 3-202(2): “An indorsement must be written by or on behalf of the holder and on the instrument . . . .”

    Applying a stamp with a double-whammy indorsement is not writing. And a COPY of the note is not the instrument.

    Would this double stamp be considered a fraudulent alteration of the note if it appears on a second copy of the note submitted in discovery, after the first copy of a note was attached to the complaint without the stamped indorsements?

Leave a Reply