MORTGAGE FRAUD WAS NOT ONLY NEVER FIXED, BUT IT WAS ALSO NEVER CHANGED AT ALL. FORECLOSING PARTIES ARE STILL ASSIGNING MORTGAGES AND DEEDS OF TRUST TO TRANSFER THE OWNERSHIP OF YOUR DEBT. THE SUPREME COURT MADE IT CLEAR THAT AN ASSIGNMENT OF A MORTGAGE HAS NO EFFECT... IN 1872!

Thursday, August 27, 2020

FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE & DANNY HAMMOND'S MIKE SINGLETARY OFFENSE FOR BORROWERS FACING MORTGAGE FRAUD

“There is only one way to succeed in anything and that is to give it everything.”

                                                                             Vince Lombardi

Reposted because it is the 3rd most popular article out of 167 articles still posted

by Danny Hammond


The theory behind my "Mike Singletary Mortgage Fraud Offense" begins with the premise that in your foreclosure court there are some nameless players who aren't really affecting the game as much as you think.

These players include the Imposter and Fictitious Payee Foreclosing party who is pushing a baseless claim and its attorneys who are the puppets voicing this claim. But, there is one party in your court who is keeping you from winning.

It is no secret that I think it is your judge and I am almost always right.  So, to explain my strategy let's pretend that your court is a football game. You are in the right which puts you down on your opponent's 30-yard line with the ball and one minute left to score a touchdown and win the game.   Your foreclosure judge is the embodiment of Mike Singletary. For the 8 people in America who are not children, but still haven't heard of Mike Singletary, he was the phenomenal middle linebacker who was drafted by the Chicago Bears in the 2nd round of the 1981 NFL Draft and became to be known as probably the greatest linebacker of all time as "The Heart of the Defense" for the Chicago Bears' Monsters of the Midway in the mid-1980s.

So, in my little metaphor, Mike Singletary represents your judge and he has been knocking down passes, sacking you, the quarterback, stuffing all the running plays and pretty much controlling the game. He is offsides on every play.  He is holding lineman, interfering with pass receivers, roughing the quarterback and generally is operating with complete disregard for the rules.  There is no accountability for his actions.  No one will argue with him.  He is accountable to no one.  There are no consequences for his actions.

You are not going to win if Mike Singletary continues to play.

Therefore, Mike Singletary must be removed from play, no matter what it takes. So, you call a timeout and on the next play, you send 15 players on the field and hike the ball to the quarterback who takes a knee while the other 14 players pile on Mike and twist his ankles, bite his ears, and break his arm.

This is, of course, against the rules so you accept your penalty for "too many men on the field " and huddle up. Three plays later you score. You win because you neutralized the one person who is intent on beating you on this day and he could have without brutal and decisive action.





Tuesday, August 25, 2020

THE BORROWER CAN CHALLENGE ASSIGNMENTS PURSUANT TO THE RULINGS ON "SLORP" UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT

RICK A. SLORP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LERNER, SAMPSON & ROTHFUSS; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; SHELLIE HILL; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants-Appellees.


ALL OF THE FORECLOSING PARTIES HAVE BEEN USING THE WORN OUT INTERPRETATION  OF LAW,  SAYING "THE BORROWERS CANNOT CHALLENGE ANY ASSIGNMENTS OF THE MORTGAGE".   BUT, MORTGAGE FRAUD CHANGES ALL OF THAT ACCORDING TO THE SIXTH CIRCUIT APPEALS COURT IN "SLORP"!


They're leaving you nothing and nowhere to go
Just put you in the corner like an old banjo
The strings are breakin' but you can't say no
You're runnin' with the devil and it's touch and go

                                               Emerson Lake and Powel (Running with the Devil)



      by Danny Hammond




The Imposter Foreclosing Party almost always claims that the Borrower (as the mortgagor) cannot challenge assignments. You did make your Promissory Note negotiable according to the terms of your Promissory Note that you allegedly signed. That is why the foreclosing parties use this interpretation.

But did the foreclosing party buy it legally? No almost assuredly it was never involved in a purchase and sale transaction which even involved in any real purchase of your debt.  When it did not, that's Fraud.  No matter what claims your foreclosing party makes if there is fraud present it changes the rules.  It is impossible to commit a legal act using fraudulent means or tactics.

So, this argument that the Borrower is a 3rd party to the sale of the loan and cannot challenge its validity is nonsense.  There are two reasons why I have never seen a good foreclosure (a legal one).

I really gained an understanding of how Borrowers were being railroaded and how real property laws were being broken many times every day by judges when I first read the case known as "Slorp". The attorneys we see as our adversaries could not operate as they do without the judge's inactions.  Like little kids, who without supervision, the attorneys will run amuck.  A judge is constitutionally bound to be this supervision.  It is the judge who is your adversary.  Continue reading this post and I have included the full case of Rick Slorp v Bank of America et. al.  This may be the best information you will ever read concerning your own case.

Monday, August 24, 2020

From "The Pro Se Series" by Danny Hammond: LET'S ALL JUST TAKE THREE STEPS BACK FROM CRAZY! THAT IS RULE #1-- WHEN FIGHTING MORTGAGE FRAUD:

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE:

 "ASSIGNMENT OF YOUR MORTGAGE",

EVEN THOUGH IT HAS BEEN USED ILLEGALLY
20 MILLION TIMES IN 15 YEARS



Heirs of a cold war,  that's what we've become
Inheriting troubles,  I'm mentally numb
Crazy, I just cannot bear,  That I'm living with something that just isn't fair
Mental wounds not healing.....Who and what's to blame
I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train,  I'm goin' off the rails on a crazy train
                                                                                                                      Ozzy Osborne


The Supreme Court settled the matter of assigning a mortgage or deed of trust in 1872. You can't assign those instruments.  The case is CARPENTER V LONGAN AND THE CASE IS IN THIS ARTICLE JUST BELOW. 

Find out why any assignment of the security agreement is void.  Keep reading.


by Danny Hammond


I have reviewed hundreds, possibly thousands of home loan paperwork preceding a fraudulent foreclosure.   I have read about many more.  I have never seen any deal where the foreclosing party was not relying on an assignment of the security instrument.  


IN THE 26 STATES THAT USE NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE THE MORTGAGE IS CALLED A DEED OF TRUST.  THE WORD MORTGAGE IS RARELY SPOKEN IN THESE STATES.

In Judicial foreclosure states, the assignment of the security instrument involves what is called a mortgage.  A mortgage is not a home loan.  It is merely the rule book concerning the collateral you put up to ensure that the bank will be paid back.  


A mortgage has no value and the assignment of a mortgage does NOT transfer your home loan from one party to another.  In the Non-Judicial States, the security instrument is called a Deed of Trust which serves the same purpose as a mortgage.  There is no such thing as "the assignment of a mortgage or a deed of trust.  The mortgage or deed of trust exists only as part of the loan agreement and it is incidental.  The security instrument is known as the incidental instrument (there are no laws that require collateral for a loan at all.)  


Your house is the usual collateral involving a home loan because that is where the loan money was spent.  But, collateral could also consist of one thousand Schwinn bicycles in a warehouse.  It is my strong personal belief that all (ALL) of the foreclosures in the United States from about the year 2000, or earlier, are based on the exact (EXACT) same lie.  What is that lie?


CARPENTER V LONGAN (SUPREME COURT 1872)  
THE ENTIRE RULING IS NEXT
CONTINUE READING

MORE POSTS FROM THE FORECLOSURE SOLUTIONS GROUP & DANNY HAMMOND

















FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURE SALE WITH NO DETAILED ACCOUNTING OF THE DISBURSEMENT OF THE PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE

CONTRARY TO POPULAR BELIEF THE FOLLOWING CALCULATION IS RIDICULOUS MYTH AND LEGEND  “BAD MORTGAGE LOAN” =  “BAD MORTGAGE BORROWER”

MORTGAGE FRAUD: THERE IS NO MAGIC BULLET, TRICKY ANGLE, NOR AN "AHA!" MOMENT. THE REMEDY WAS EMBEDDED IN THE CONSTITUTION BY THE BRILLIANT ANCIENTS

WHAT IF YOUR WRONGFUL FORECLOSURE WAS ALREADY VOID, BUT YOU WERE UNAWARE OF IT?

IF YOU WERE FORECLOSED AFTER YOUR MONTHLY PAYMENT SUDDENLY JUMPED UP DRAMATICALLY, YOU WERE A VICTIM OF WHAT I CALL A CALENDAR ARM

SUBJECT: MORTGAGE FRAUD--I SAY THAT YOU SHOULD SUE YOUR JUDGE, BUT UNLESS I DO IT MYSELF ISN'T THAT ADVICE A LITTLE LAME.?



YOU HAVEN'T THOUGHT ABOUT THE MORTGAGE CRISIS FOR A LONG TIME.  DID YOU THINK IT WAS OVER?  THOUSANDS OF PENSION FUNDS BOUGHT THE WALL STREET MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES BONDS CALLED TOXIC BY FEDERAL RESERVE WHICH BOUGHT THEM BACK AT PAR WITH THE MONEY THEY PRINTED











 MY NEW METAPHOR FOR "MORTGAGE FRAUD" IS A GAMBLING CASINO THAT LETS NO ONE WIN, WITHOUT ANYONE REALIZING IT





SHORT SALE OR DEED IN LIEU OF FORECLOSURE: WHICH IS THE BEST STRATEGY? NONE OF THEM!


























Thursday, August 20, 2020

Using Bank Deposits (depositors checking & savings accounts insured by taxpayers) JPMorgan Chase Lost $3.2 Billion Trading Stocks and Credit Derivatives in First Quarter: NEWS ON 07-13-2020 I HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT; WRITING ABOUT; MAKING VIDEOS ABOUT; THE FACT THERE ARE NO BANKING REGULATIONS IN THE US.... NOT SINCE 1999

THE SAME BANK HAS BEEN INVOLVED IN MILLIONS OF FRAUDULENT FORECLOSURES USING NON-EXISTENT PROMISSORY NOTES THEY CLAIM THEY INHERITED FROM WASHINGTON MUTUAL:  THE FDIC SAYS HUH-UH.



No man has a right to expect to succeed in life unless he understands his business,
and nobody can understand his business thoroughly unless he learns it by
personal application and experience.                                          
                                                                                                                                                
P. T. Barnum



by Danny Hammond

I don't think that hardly any American citizens are aware that the Democrat president Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress repealed a 66-year-old banking and finance act known as the Glass Steagall Banking Act of 1933.  This Act put together all of the research of the 1929 Wall Street Meltdown that sparked the great depression and wrote an act to prohibit ever happening again.  The Act did its job.  For 66 years there was no such event in the US.  The Act was repealed in full as an act of Deregulation of the banking and finance industry.  The president and the congress that repealed all relevant regulation of banking in 1999 put nothing back in its place.  Seven short years later Wall Street imploded triggering the Wall Street Meltdown of 2007-2008-2009 through today.  Frank Dodd was supposed to replace it, but both sides of congress had gutted it into a meaningless corpse by the time it was enacted.


There has been no meaningful regulation of finance since 1999, over twenty years.  If there are no regulations there is no need for regulators.  The only meaningful regulation coming out of Frank-Dodd was provided by the Consumer Finance Protection Bureau.  Donald Trump sent his evil little henchman Mick Mulvaney to render it useless in 2017.  It took him 3 days to send 100 million dollars in collected fines back to the banks that paid had voluntarily paid them.


Mick Mulvaney

Acting Director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

In-office November 25, 2017 – December 11, 2018

President

Donald Trump

Deputy

Leandra English Brian Johnson (acting)




The CFPB has been around but has done nothing relevant since December of 2018.  If you have been wondering why the CFPB does not answer your pleadings for help, it is because there is no one there to read them.  This is what the word deregulation means in America in the 21st century.


The taxpayers propped up the "Too Big To Fail Banks" with 3 trillion dollars.  The revived banks have been on a relentless crime spree ever since.  Responsible for tens of millions of fraudulent foreclosures based on servicing lists and not Promissory Notes.


In the headline in the story below from Wall Street On Parade, the beginning of the headline says"Using Bank Deposits".  By this, they mean JPMorgan Chase used the money from the depositors checking and savings accounts to fund "risky investments".  Glass-Steagall does did not allow this.  However, there is no prohibition from doing this in NO regulation.  Nothing is prohibited.  This has not been fixed for twenty years.  Wake up depositors, JPMorgan Chase was using taxpayer insured (FDIC) checking and savings deposits to fund its risky investments.  These particular risky investments were in fact so risky they failed to the tune of 3.2 Billion bucks.  The taxpayers will just have to pay even more taxes to cover it.  Jamie Dimon is no better than a modern-day Al Capone.  CONTINUE READING



WOULD YOU LIKE A FREE ASSESSMENT

OF YOUR FORECLOSURE CASE? 

FILL OUT THE FORM CLICK THIS LINE


RELATED ARTICLES: by Danny Hammond


From "The Pro Se Series" by Danny Hammond: DEREGULATION-THE PROBLEMS WITH OUR INABILITY TO STOP MORTGAGE FRAUD INVOLVES WRONGDOING BY MANY PEOPLE, BUT JUST FOUR WORDS DEFINE THIS PROBLEM CAUSING RUNAWAY FORECLOSURE FRAUD-

 

PART 1: WHY DEREGULATION IS ONE OF THE TWO GREAT CAUSES OF 20 MILLION AMERICAN FAMILY HOMES BEING WRONGFULLY FORECLOSED ON SINCE 1999 AND WHY 10 MILLION RETIREES MAY NOT BE GETTING THE PENSIONS THAT THEY WERE PROMISED



Part 2: WHY DEREGULATION IS ONE OF THE TWO GREAT CAUSES OF 20 MILLION AMERICAN FAMILY HOMES BEING WRONGFULLY FORECLOSED ON SINCE 1999 AND WHY 10 MILLION RETIREES MAY NOT BE GETTING THE PENSIONS THAT THEY WERE PROMISED


PART 3: WHY DEREGULATION IS ONE OF THE TWO GREAT CAUSES OF 20 MILLION AMERICAN FAMILY HOMES BEING WRONGFULLY FORECLOSED ON SINCE 1999 AND WHY 10 MILLION RETIREES MAY NOT BE GETTING THE PENSIONS THAT THEY WERE PROMISED