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!

CONTINUE: From "The Pro Se Series" by Danny Hammond: THE AFTER EFFECTS OF BEING WRONGFULLY FORECLOSED ON WILL FOLLOW YOU. YOUR PROBLEMS ARE NOT OVER JUST BECAUSE YOUR FORECLOSURE IS OVER. JUST WHEN YOU ARE COPING WITH THE FORECLOSURE, YOU WILL BE EVICTED IN THE LOWEST OF ALL COURTS AND THEN THERE ARE MORE CASCADING AND PAINFUL CONSEQUENCES YOU MAY STILL ENDURE.

READ MORE


THE SECOND PARTY  which bears the burden proof and who must review the words in the lawsuit and must determine what the words say and if they include "concrete and particularized" evidence that the Plaintiff's injury is real and needs to be addressed, this party is the judge of this case whose court is being asked to hear this case.

The Burden of the Borrower (now read these words carefully) is to deny that he was in default with the party claiming they have a right to foreclose.  The Borrower is not saying that he does not owe anyone, he is saying that he doesn't owe this particular Imposter or Fictitious Payee.  It doesn't matter if he is in default with someone else, because this court can only decide if he owes money or if he doesn't owe money to this Plaintiff in this case.  If a Plaintiff doesn't even claim an injury in his lawsuit, then the case must be dismissed, before this case gets out of the starting blocks.


I have read hundreds of cases and have seen thousands of cases online.  I have never seen a court even mention Standing, except for judges who said: "I have already determined the standing" and when he said that he meant that he decided it in his head.  He had not read the words and let the words tell the story.  He waved his magic arm and determined the standing from his intuition and gut instinct.


When a judge does this he breaks a law.  This is the only law that he can break and lose his protection of "absolute immunity" to prosecution.  He has taken an action of Deprivation of Civil Rights of a citizen.  Yes, everyone is missing it, but this is all about depriving Borrowers of their constitutional civil rights. This is the highest crime that a judge can commit.  It is so dire, that when he does this, he is not a judge, he is an ordinary citizen and if he makes an order or ruling other than to dismiss the case, he was conducting no court case at all and any rules or orders he gives are void.


Yes, that is happening in nearly all of the cases of Borrowers in every state and every level of court.  It is Unbelievable.  But, that does not mean it is not true.  It is true, it is just hard to believe.


I have experienced this myself and I have heard from hundreds of others personally. I have read parts and pieces about it in newspapers and online news.   But, only a few times have I seen Borrowers treated as the Constitution demands and directs and the United States Supreme has defined, exclusively in earlier times.  

Here is an example of a congressman saying the right things to the right people. NY Rep (D) Congressman Gregory Meeks ripping into one of the hoards of Wall Street bad actors.  Congress Meeks speaks at an important time to defend the citizens from Wall Street's greed and sociopathic behavior.  But, he is one voice amongst the roaring silence of nearly every congressman we have sent to Washington on our behalf. Nearly all failing to serve our interests as mandated, but evidently succeeding in some way in achieving their own personal goals and agenda.

We are still standing and applauding this congressman for speaking the simple truth about Bank Fraud!! Representative Meeks is a true representative of the people. Who else can we say that about?

Reposted from September 2016 by Danny Hammond

VIDEO: NY REP (D) GREGORY MEEKS DESTROYS WELLS FARGO CEO JOHN STUMPF BEFORE CONGRESS!

But, the judges are not obeying any of this.  They are daily, on a routine basis, violating the civil rights of  Borrowers and ruling for the foreclosing party and giving an Imposter or Fictitious Payee a house that they have no right to.  That is horrible, but that is not the end of the suffering that the judge as placed on the Borrower.

The judge has just placed the burden of proof on the Borrower rather than the racketeers in court working out a scheme or con and in all reality are cooperating in stealing a house that they have no interest in at all.  They will sell it and pay no one lender off and make a 100% profit.  So, first, the judge made it impossible for the Borrower to win by placing the burden of proof on the Borrower.  Next, since the Borrower cannot win from that backward position, the judge will rule against him and give a house that the doesn't own and give it to the Foreclosing Party doesn't own it either.

The judge has just violated the civil rights of the Borrower for the second time.  If the Foreclosing Party gets a house for which he was not owed money, then there must still be a Promissory Note out there somewhere.  The Borrower doesn't have the house anymore, which is bad enough, but it gets worse.  If and when the real party with the real Promissory Note shows up to collect, guess what.  He now is obligated to pay off the Promissory Note.  So, he is in a position of having to pay for the 2nd time, but he no longer has the house to do so.

So, what is this 2nd civil right of the Borrower that the judge has violated?  We each have the civil right to never be placed in a position by the courts where we might have to pay off the same debt twice.  That is also called "Deprivation of Civil Rights" (to be deprived of) and the judge is guilty, guilty, guilty.

The judge has taken the shameful and bizarre position of helping the Racketeer Pirates steal the loot.

          Captain Ricky "the Racketeer Pirate"

So, now you have lost your house and you may have to pay for it twice.  Surely, that is all they can do to you.  Nope, it gets worse.

You don't own your house, but you still live in it.  Or even if you leave and you aren't living in it, the bad guys have to evict you in eviction court.  So, you have been foreclosed on, that is a big credit hit.  You have been evicted, a bigger hit because you now have to find somewhere to live.  Rentals are sky-high now.  Why?  Because with all of the Borrowers being foreclosed and evicted they are now competing for the rentals.  The owners of the rental properties are in the catbird seat because of your two judges.

Two?  Yes, the foreclosure judge and the eviction have turned real estate on its ear.  You don't have your home, you have bad credit and you used up your money trying to fight your foreclosure.  So, the only problems you now have are:

1.  Telling your kids that they have to change schools.

2.  You don't know where those schools will be, because you first have to find something to live in that you can afford and that the owner will rent to you with your newly bad credit.

3.   You and your spouse will certainly begin to argue about the same thing that is the number one reason marriages end up in divorce...money.

Now it is truly getting about as bad as it can get.  I have eight evictions on my credit.  Fannie Mae foreclosed on my eight investment properties and evicted me as the owner and stole my tenants.  I did not have a loan on any of those properties.  I repeat, I had no loans.  The judge ruled against me because he believed that "Fannie Mae wouldn't lie".  "So, must be the dead beat Borrower that is lying".
                                                                                                                  Danny the "Day Dreaming" Pirate
Sometimes I daydream that I turn dark inside and I become a Racketeer  Pirate.  Sailing the bounding neighborhoods and villages looting and plundering from the sucker Borrowers.

Why not?  I know how to do it better than any of those guys. I have seen them in action over the past ten years.

But, I am cursed.

I am an American Damnit!  Even worse something evil lurks in my DNA.  Ethics.                                                                     
                                                                                                   
Ugghh!  So, you guys are stuck with me because I really believe that I am on the right course now.  If judges won't obey the laws we trap them into denying our Civil Rights.  I am not kidding.  No matter what stage of foreclosure you and your home are in, it is never too late.  There is no statute of limitations on the Lack of Standing and the Lack of the Court's Subject Matter Jurisdiction.

II.  EVICTION

Now, here comes the rest of the bad news.  The moment that the judge ruled for the Racketeering Pirates claim, which a blind fool could have seen was just the Pirates taking advantage of this corrupt and protected scam, he was going to sign a writ of an eviction and send it to the Sheriff (in most states) and that was all it took to steal a house.

You may have fought your foreclosure and held off the foreclosing party for years. I have helped clients remain in their homes after non-judicial and judicial foreclosures for up to six years. Then a judge makes the ruling against you when you know in your mind and heart that he can't make that call. His order is wrong. But, he is going to send a writ to the Sheriff before you can absorb this ruling that has left you "thunderstruck".

You may have fought the eviction, you may still be fighting it.  You have fought and stalled events and you are battle-hardened.  Which is not a good thing.  You will begin to change.  You will be over-anxious, overstressed, and obsessive-compulsive.  This is going to affect your health and your relationships.  You have been barred from your right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness".

The scene as I see it in my mind is ghastly.  You and your spouse must tell the kids that they have to change schools and make new friends.  You rent a truck that since your court battle you you now can't afford.

You look for a house or apartment to rent (I had not lived in an apartment since 1971. I now reside in an apartment) and you find that rents have risen dramatically and that the requirements for FICO score and income are very, very strict.  It is easier today to qualify to buy a house than it is to rent a place to live in.  You are starting over and you have had illegally taken from you the largest and most prized possession you 
will ever own.

It is easy to see why rents are so high.  Somewhere around 30 million families were thrown out of their homes by the Imposters and Fictitious Payees who have taken advantage of the deregulation of the finance and investment industries by Congress.  

The courts have been quite openly complicit in paving the way for these foreclosures by placing the burden of proof on the Borrowers in violation of Article III Standing requirements for the courts to run the cases.

My wife has suffered more than me.  We both believe it is up to me to get us out of this situation.  She looks to me, but I can look to no one.  She has been diagnosed with PTSD.  I am sure that I would be also, but I don't have the time or the reason to get a professional to tell me what I already know is true.

Weird things will happen to you next.  Yours may not be the same as mine but they will have the same cause.

I have found out what things cost.  I had not even wondered about this issue in 45 years.  My god, the grocery store is ridiculous.  A cart full but not overflowing can cost over $150 on many trips.

Our furniture would not fit into an apartment, so I have had to rent from Aarons, which actually isn't such a bad deal if you are strapped for cash.  I have paid off all kinds of stuff.  

Yes, you pay retail plus interest, but after expending all of your time and money fighting the court, cash is king.  I just want to know the monthly payments.

In my mind, I am renting a TV then out of the blue I get a notice that I own it. Hoorah, for me. If I get my old life back I won't do it anymore. But, it is a great business model for Aarons in this economy.

With the past, horrid administrations in the White House and Congress, and I don't just mean Trump, although he is the worst human being that I have ever seen and I cannot comprehend how 41% of actual Americans follow him like a cult.  I didn't know that a man could hurt so many people and still be beloved.  I have read  "Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" three times.  Everyone should read it.

Trump has followed Hitler's steps to rise to power in an identical series of events.  I don't think Trump has read the book, he was just born with the same mixture of bone, blood, hormones, and chemicals as the Fuehrer.  There DNA must be identical.

But, I lost track of what I was saying.  The past administrations including Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc. have all lost their moral compass.

But, back to my post-eviction experiences, my apartment experiences have been straight out of the Twilight Zone. 

I was evicted from a very nice place in Lees Summit Missouri Summit Ridge Apartments for pointing out that a clause in their contract was in conflict with the state of Missouri Landlord-Tenant laws and with federal law in the sections and paragraphs of the Federal Debt Collection Act (FDCPA).

I noticed that they showed I had two late payments on my account.  I had never been more than five days late in 2 and a half years.  I looked at the ledger of rents due and rents paid and I realized that the management was combining my rent payment adding rent and late fees and other charges altogether as rent.

I am a real estate broker/owner and I have dealt with rental property all of my life.

The reason they do that is that if you don't realize it is happening you might take a check over for exactly your rent.  Mine was $1,500 per month.  If I paid $1,500 for my rent and I had a $10 other charge, my rent payment was short and all of the rent was deemed late.  If I didn't notice this, then the end of the month would come around and I would get a $100 late fee added to what I owed and now it would be combined with rent due.  I pointed this out to them and they took me to court for eviction. The judge in Associate Circuit Court, or what I call "sewer court", you know DWI, petty theft, nuisance, and, of course, eviction.  I knew that I should win.  

But, the judge ruled for the Landlord ignoring state and federal law, and it all started happening again.   My FICO was hit with an eviction.  That will not help you find a place to live.

I had to get a friend and business partner to co-sign my next apartment lease, like a kid and his parents.

I have again paid for two and a half years of $1,010 per month and I have never been late.  I didn't challenge their lease although it had the identical rent clause combining rent and other charges.

I was talking to one of the management office people who I had gotten to know and she told me that they were evicting me because they had found out who I was and that they had gone through this website.  Rats,

I should have used a fake code name.

I was a whole different guy this time.  The judge told me show was going to rule against me and for the landlord.  I went on a rant and explained that she should not move this case forward because I would sue her and that I had just made a federal case out of it (remember when you used to give someone trouble and they would say, "well don't make a federal case out of it".  (Now I know how to make a federal case in state court and I did it.)  

She listened carefully and I know that I had her worried.  She suddenly stopped the court picked up both our files and said, "I am not going to rule today, I am taking this under advisement."  She then stood up and left.  I was sure that I had just won.  

Three days later she ruled against me.  Once again I was thunderstruck.  I am going to write up a federal lawsuit against two sewer court judges just as soon as I finish this article and get it posted.

I find this unbelievable.  You the reader probably do too.  We always doubt someone that says I was wrongly evicted and I had evidence.

I will now provide my evidence to you. It is simple and easy to read. You be the judge. Please Comment at the end of this posting.



YOU BE THE JUDGE!

"HERE COME 'DA  JUDGE!"  AGAIN & AGAIN & AGAIN

THE EVIDENCE:

CAPTION TO MY ANSWER TO RENT & POSSESSION LAWSUIT


IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY, MISSOURI

ASSOCIATE DIVISION AT INDEPENDENCE

ARAGON 2015/THE MANSION, LLC      

d/b/a The Mansion Apartments                

Plaintiff,                                                      

                                                                                                Case No.  2016-CV00639

V.                                                                                             Judge Kendra J. Stockdale

                                                                  

DANIEL LYNN HAMMOND                   
                                                            
Independence, MO 64055                          

Defendants. 
                                             

DEFENDANTS ANSWER TO PETITION

DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO DISMISS THE CASE FOR LACK OF ARTICLE III

STANDING FOR THE PLAINTIFF AND THEREFORE A  LACK OF SUBJECT 

MATTER  JURISDICTION FOR THIS COURT PURSUANT  TO FRCP RULE 12 (b)(1), 

FRCP RULE 12 (h)(3), AS WELL FRCP RULE 17 (a)(1)



DEFENDANTS’ ARE INVOKING THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO CHALLENGE 
STANDING AT ANY TIME 


COUNT I

DEPRIVATION OF CIVIL RIGHTS


COMES NOW The Defendants and for their Answer to the Petition, Amended Motion to Dismiss for

Lack of Article III Constitutional Standing and therefore a lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction for this

Court Pursuant to FRCP Rule 12 (b)(1) and FRCP Rule 12 (h)(3) and FRCP Rule 17 (a)(1) and the Defendants' invocation of their rights to Challenge Article III Standing at any time and Deprivation of constitutional civil rights of the Defendants, The Defendants now state,

1.)  That this Motion is based on The Federal Question.  Defendants are Challenging Article III
Constitutional Standing of the Plaintiff ARAGON 2015/THE MANSION, LLC d/b/a The Mansion Apartments (hereinafter “Aragon”) to bring this petition before this or any court.  Because of Plaintiff

did not claim to have suffered an “Injury in Fact”, or an actual injury, nor did they demonstrate the validity of this claim using “Concrete and Particularized” evidence of any injury.  Standing is a Constitutional threshold question. The plaintiff’s claims do not meet the constitutional, irreducible, minimum requirements of Standing.  (See Exhibit-  Supreme Court Definition of “STANDING”)

2.)  That, Defendants, have the Article III constitutional right to challenge standing at any time, even upon appeal.  Defendants are declaring that they are challenging the Article III Standing of Aragon and at this time.

Above I really have made a federal case out of it.  Even sewer state courts in all states have subject matter jurisdiction to decide if the Plaintiff has proven Article III Standing.  

EVIDENCE:  THE OFFENDING CLAUSE

The Defendants are claiming that the Plaintiff has applied these rent payments from Defendants in violation with state and federal statutes.  RENT, by law, cannot be co-mingled with late fees and/or other charges. 

Plaintiff has, for approximately 18 months, been doing just that.  Even when given instructions by Defendants in writing to apply monies to rent only, or to other charges only.

The Plaintiff, repeats his untrue claim over and over just like the attorneys in foreclosure cases when confronted with the exact laws this Paragraph called RENTS is violating, and then refers over and over to the lease and what paragraph 6. says.  The Plaintiff then claims over and over if it is in his lease and I signed it then it is enforceable.  

If the Plaintiff put a clause in his lease that said he could murder a client who was late on his rent would that be an enforceable paragraph?   No, both examples are ridiculous except to Associate judge Kendra J. Stockdale.

This is, of course, nonsense.  There is no illegal act that is unenforceable, which will become enforceable if it is written into a contract and signed by a party.  No one can waive an illegal part of a contract intentionally or unintentionally.

The paragraph was not placed into the lease innocently.  Its intent is to combine money intended to pay rent with late fees and/or other charges.  If a tenant owes $1,000 in rent and pays $1,000 his rent the landlord applies the rent money to late fees and to other charges instead of rent in this scheme or artifice. 

The consequence is that the landlord still shows that rent is unpaid.  If the tenant does not pay
these late fees until the next due date the landlord claims new late fees on top of the other fees.  

The tenant now owes more in fees than is legal.  The landlord is guilty of "unjust enrichment".  But, you aren't going to win in Associate Circuit court, because the judge in her wildest dreams cannot see a case where the landlord was the "pig sucking" liar and the tenant is in the right.

This is the lowest court of the state and federal court system and you cannot win there.

Both state and federal laws direct money the tent directs to be paid to rent cannot be comingled with rent.  Neither law says that the tenant does not owe the other charges.  The two laws only say that they are not rent.  They only say that you can't be evicted for late fees and other charges if your rent is paid.  The laws clearly state that the remedy for other monies owed is to get a judgment against the tenant.

Paragraph 6. in the lease and declares that this clause lets them combine rent and late fees and other charges and that they can call all charges together as RENT, then apply rent payments to late fees and other charges as they see fit.  

EXHIBIT:  PARAGRAPH 6. OF THE SUBJECT LEASE

RENT AND OTHER CHARGES. Unless modified by addenda, you will pay

$ 1010.00 commencing and continuing each month thereafter during the pendency of this Lease

Contract.

X at the on-site manager's office, or

X at our online payment site,

You must pay your rent on or before the 1st day of each month (due date) with no grace period. Cash is unacceptable without our prior written permission. You must not withhold or offset rent unless authorized by statute. We may, at our option, require at any time That you pay all rent and other sums in cash, certified or cashier's check,  money order,  or one monthly check rather than multiple checks. At our discretion, we may Convert any and all checks via the 
Automated Clearing House (ACH) system for the purposes of collecting payment. If you don't pay all rent on or before the 3rd day of the month, you'll pay an initial late charge of $100.00  plus a late charge of $5.00    per day after that date until paid in full. Daily late charges will not exceed 15 days for any single month's rent. You'll also pay a charge of $50.00   for each returned check or rejected electronic payment, plus initial and daily late charges from the due date until we receive acceptable payment.

(next is the illegal clause)

"All payment obligations of the Resident under this Lease shall be considered rent".  

If you don't pay rent on time, you'll be delinquent and all remedies under this Lease Contract will be authorized. We'll also have all other remedies for such violations.


BUT FEDERAL AND STATE STATUTE DICTATES THE EXACT OPPOSITE

FEDERAL LAW STATES THAT THIS PARAGRAPH IS IN CONFLICT WITH


The Fair Debt Collections Practices Act (FDCPA) of 1977 states in U.S.C. 15 §

810 Multiple Payments 1692h:

"If any consumer owes multiple debts and makes any single payment to any debt collector with respect to such debts, such debt collector may not apply such payment to any debt which is disputed by the consumer and, where applicable, shall apply such payment in accordance with the consumer's directions".

STATE STATUTE PARAGRAPH 6 IS IN CONFLICT WITH”

That Missouri statute RSMO 535.020 provides that- "concerning the Procedure to recover possession The landlord or agent may, in such an action for unpaid rent, join a claim for any other unpaid sums, other than property damages, regardless of how denominated or defined in the lease, to be paid by or on behalf of a tenant to a landlord for any purpose set forth in the lease; provided that such other sums shall not be considered rent for purposes of this chapter, and judgment for the landlord for recovery of such other sums shall not by itself entitle the landlord to order for recovery of possession of the premises."

10.)  Defendants claim that a paragraph that is a conflict with law is void.  Defendants do not claim that this affects the rest of the contract if the rest of the contract is not in conflict with the law, but the paragraph in question cannot be enforced.  (See Exhibit Paragraph 6. above)

Now you also know that no matter how tired you think you are and no matter how much you want to just get it over with.  It is going to get worse.  You are way better off fighting for your home.  It's going to be much harder to get it back.

I am not saying that if you have been foreclosed illegally (the chances are near 100% that you have) and that you have been evicted and the Imposters and Fictitious Payess purchased your home that it is all over.  But, the judge has put you through hell and that is the strategy of all of the parties against you.  If you can be thrown out of your home, they believe that you will not have the time or energy to keep fighting them.

 But, I'm saying the chance of getting your home back and the bad guys owing you money are exactly the same as before.  That is the position that I have been in for nine years.  I am still fighting for you and me to gain the justice of enforcing our civil rights.  I personally feel it is a civic duty now.


No comments:

Post a Comment

COMMENTS AND THOUGHTS HERE