Mass. Supreme Court : foreclosure sales over the last 5 years are null and void

Well this is fun.

Guest Post: Houston, We've Got A Problem - Bevilacqua

On Oct. 18th, 2011 the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court handed down their decision in the FRANCIS J. BEVILACQUA, THIRD vs. PABLO RODRIGUEZ – and in a moment, essentially made foreclosure sales in the commonwealth over the last five years wholly void. However, some of the more polite headlines, undoubtedly in the interest of not causing wide spread panic simply put it "SJC puts foreclosure sales in doubt" or "Buyer Can't Sue After Bad Foreclosure Sale"

In essence, the ruling upheld that those who had purchased foreclosure properties that had been illegally foreclosed upon (which is virtually all foreclosure sales in the last five years), did not in fact have title to those properties.

Given the fact that more than two-thirds of all real estate transactions in the last five years have also been foreclosed properties, this creates a small problem.

So if you bought a ``foreclosed house`` in Massachusetts... there's a good chance you will lose it.

This is about to cause a huge huge huge huge huge crapfest. It's not just in Massachussets. It's in ALL STATES. It's gonna be epic.

But knowing how CORRUPT the legislature, the cops and judges are... will this get any traction? Will the law be applied or just ignored because it would cause a huge crapstorm?

If the MSM were doing their job, this would be the topic everyone is talking about. But no, the MSM are protecting their lords and masters the big banks.

I am not versed enough in this subject, but am interested to see what other have to say. Wonder who will be left holding the bag (awesome NOFX song btw)?

reply to post by Vitchilo


Mate

I reckon crapstorm imminent.

"However, it should be easy enough for investors similarly situated to Bevilacqua to simply hire fee contingent attorneys who can sue the banks and servicers for conveying fraudulent deeds – that seems like a much easier and logical proposition. When the potentially millions of lawsuits are added to the complaints filed by investors in MBS, we think the banks will finally be revealed as wholly insolvent." also from the linked article in the OP.

Then again, there may just be enough space left under the carpet to clean this up. Like you say if this gets no air time the banks will be dodging a bullet and no mistake.

Cheers

WOOOO let it burn baby!!!

reply to post by Vitchilo


Umm .. can you point me to a case where someone actually avoided a foreclosure because the bank "didn't have the deed" or whatever nonsense? There are numerous cases of real illegal foreclosures (such as foreclosing a soldiers home while he's deployed) but the vast majority of foreclosures are completely legal regardless if the "real deed" is shown. You don't pay your bills you loose your house. Don't want that to happen, pay for your own house.

Ostriches are said to have discovered this the hard way. On November 12th, 2010 in our article "Tattoos, Pyramid Schemes and Social Justice" we advocated that home owners, with securitized mortgages, regardless of their ability to pay, consider suspending their mortgage payments, and place those funds into a private escrow account instead. We wrote: "Radical though it may seem, we believe the only way to stop the chaos of fraud and the breakdown of the rule of law in our courts, and most importantly to ensure that we ourselves are not participants in the fraud, is for homeowners who can afford their mortgage to stop paying it..." The article goes on to say: "For example, what is easier; to scorn those who are being foreclosed on because they can no longer afford their mortgage or to accept the possibility that our entire financial, and maybe justice system might be badly corrupted? Across all spectrums of crime, victims are often blamed, just ask attorneys who represent rape victims. This phenomenon is by no means unique to mortgage fraud, or those who have been raped by the institutions who carry out this trade. It has been made to appear as if those who have fallen on hard times are a matter of "incidental" inequalities in an otherwise procedurally just system. However, it is precisely the opposite which is true. Our financial institutions have created deliberate inequalities, through the use of procedurally unjust systems." We pointed out that suspending such payment might be done for the following reasons, which in light of the recent Bevilacqua decision, and the pending Eaton Decision, are increasingly being proven correct: "1. They are not sure where or if their payments are going to the true note holder. 2. They no longer know who the true note holder is. 3. They have a legitimate concern that they may not be able to ever obtain clear title and/or title insurance (in the event of a sale) given what we now know about improperly conveyed titles and the illegitimacy of "MERS". 4. They do not want to be an unwitting or passive participant in fraud. 5. They care about America, want our culture to be healed and recognize the dignity of every human being." Long before the Ibanez decision was handed down we wrote the following (taken from the same article): "If these legitimate reasons are the cause to suspend mortgage payments, then what attack on these "non-co-operators" character can be levelled? In these cases, Judge's will have to allow for proper civil procedure to take place in order for the legitimate inquiries of concerned Americans to come to light. Since banks virtually never produce adequate documentation (which appears to be by design), chances are things will escalate." We went on to discuss the unique risks of apathy and denial in the following: "...Americans have a duty to ask critical questions about the operations of their financial institutions, and if evidence has been presented that a deal was made, but not everyone was playing by the rules, than those deals need to be looked at again. It is not good enough any longer to say, if it doesn't affect "me" than, I'm not getting involved. We have a duty to one another as Americans, and more importantly as human beings, to care about truth and justice. What's more, apathy, so long as we are not affected, is a short lived consolation. Ultimately, this crisis will affect everyone sooner or later."

www.zerohedge.com...

interesting article, thank you....
glad to see at least some of the states standing up for what is right....

reply to post by Rockpuck

can you point me to a case where someone actually avoided a foreclosure because the bank "didn't have the deed" or whatever nonsense?

Actually there's thousands of cases like that. Thing is, you have to know about it, ask for the note, and go to court. The bank will lose every time.

but the vast majority of foreclosures are completely legal regardless if the "real deed" is shown.

No they are not. Even Citi's top guy testified to congress about this, saying that 80%+ of their mortgages done in 2007 were frauds.

FCIC hearing

These mortgages were sold to Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and other investors. Although we did not underwrite these mortgages, Citi did rep and warrant to the investors that the mortgages were underwritten to Citi credit guidelines.

In mid-2006 I discovered that over 60% of these mortgages purchased and sold were defective. Because Citi had given reps and warrants to the investors that the mortgages were not defective, the investors could force Citi to repurchase many billions of dollars of these defective assets. This situation represented a large potential risk to the shareholders of Citigroup.

I started issuing warnings in June of 2006 and attempted to get management to address these critical risk issues. These warnings continued through 2007 and went to all levels of the Consumer Lending Group.

We continued to purchase and sell to investors even larger volumes of mortgages through 2007. And defective mortgages increased during 2007 to over 80% of production.

All those mortgages are FRAUDS. 80% at Citi. What are the numbers at BAC? AIG? Freddie? Probably the same numbers.

You don't pay your bills you loose your house.

Nope. You get a bailout.

Don't want that to happen, pay for your own house.

And how do you do that when interest rate go through the roof? Or congress and big business are doing everything they can to ship the jobs abroad? Or the FED is creating massive inflation? Etc...

It's not about paying your house or not. It's about fraud. Big banks committed fraud and they need to pay for it. Too bad if they go bankrupt because of it.

here here

the banksters rely on our ignorance and their amazing talent to predict that most of us will go along with their myths that we owe them interest on money they created out of thin air

This as always, makes the lawyers rich.

They knew this ahead of time.
They had studies that indicated the problem would spiral.

Also, doesn't title insurance cover anything?

They have created a catch22 for anybody who owns private property.

They have created the 'anonymity' that makes money for the 'anonymous'


The target agenda could be this:

Private ownership of land is not compatible with socialism, communism, or with global governance as described by the United Nations. Stalin, Hitler, Castro, Mao - all took steps to forcefully nationalize the land as an essential first step toward controlling their citizens. The UN, without the use of military force, is attempting to achieve the same result.

The land policy of the United Nations was first officially articulated at the United Nations Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat I), held in Vancouver, May 31 - June 11, 1976. Agenda Item 10 of the Conference Report sets forth the UN's official policy on land. The Preamble says:

"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. The provision of decent dwellings and healthy conditions for the people can only be achieved if land is used in the interests of society as a whole. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...."

The Preamble is followed by nine pages of specific policy recommendations endorsed by the participating nations, including the United states. Here are some of those recommendations: ...........

Read this for the plan that the US signed off on !
The UN and property rights

What happens when you have all the wealth in the world to hire fleets of psychologists and lawyers and spin doctors and just about control the media?
We are programmed to an unbelievable degree just by the placing of the social fences, much like cattle are programmed to come and be milked twice a day withut being called to the barn.....
The depth of the social programming we endure cannot be overestimated...it is what keeps the system going when even the stupid know its bankrupt.
We have to break the ugly trance we are kept in.......

reply to post by Rockpuck


Morons always forget details no?

if a bank has a deed, you pay them the loan..if they ILLEGALLY break up the deed (title for retards), illegally sell portions of it off, fraudulantly then bet against those loans, insure those loans so when the inevitable happens, profit there too, and then try and take something they NO LONGER OWN then.............

and all of those pile of crap deputies who assisted the banks in taking something from a family (shelter) and give it to a corrupt greedy multi-national corp. then those piles of crap deputies should be hung...

Originally posted by scoobdude
.... Wonder who will be left holding the bag

Through their financial trickery they have created a method for SOMEONE to be paying Taxes on that Property to help out States get revenue to pay their Retired Teachers, Cops, Prison Workers...etc.

That's what it's all about. How to fund the unfundable. Financial Schemes.

reply to post by Vitchilo


A "defective" Mortgage is not an "illegal" mortgage ... it's simply a mortgage that is not performing. That is to say, negative LTV or in the beginning stages of foreclosure. He never said "fraud" once, only "defective" which we also call "subprime."

Nope. You get a bailout.

Assuming the bank has neither the Title nor the Deed to the house and or mortgage then that bank would loose rights to collect on the property. However some 85% of all mortgages are held by one of the two GSE's Fannie or Freddie and they typically do have, at the very least, the Title or part of it. Assuming they do not the county's treasury will have recorded information regarding the tax payer of the property. In no case except through blatant illegal terms will someone be awarded the house outright.

reply to post by rebeldog

Morons always forget details no?

Are you calling me a moron? Really?

if a bank has a deed, you pay them the loan..if they ILLEGALLY break up the deed (title for retards)

Ok ... so for the .. ahem .. retards like yourself out there let me help you:

A Deed is the legal contract in which the mortgage is signed in good faith in front of a witness. In every case this is signed in the presence of the realtors, your self, sometimes the seller, and always the Title Agency or 3rd party. The deed itself is the "ownership" paper of the property dictating who "owns" the property. Here's a hint: It's never you. Not if you have a mortgage .. it is saying that this is your house that you are paying on, but until you pay off the mortgage the BANK owns the house.

The Mortgage itself is then backstopped by one of the two GSE's Frannie or Freddie. This is where the Title comes into play, because the Title is the entire proceedings of the mortgage process, not just the writ of ownership. The Title can be broken up into however many pieces the banks want, usually F&F get a piece as the underwriter, sometimes the whole thing. But the banks can sell the collector rights to the mortgage, or the entire thing amongst themselves.

And assuming you find yourself a kickass expensive lawyer to take on the big banks to get the original Deed/Title in the vast majority of cases the bank will find it. Banks keep original and copies of EVERYTHING, I know because I've been around them when I worked for a bank. Now most banks outsource the storage to 3rd parties, their systems are far more organized.

The only time I have ever seen someone "awarded" a house was one case where a guy proved his mortgage broker lied on the forms and lied to him, selling him a house he couldn't afford. He was lucky that he was able to prove it.

My experience? I was a claims adjuster for Citi Mortgage. My favorite part of the job was idiots thinking they could pull one over on me or the bank and I'd get to pull out the Title package and say "well actually......" Puts a whole new meaning to signing your life away. Just think it through and get a damn good lawyer before you try to stop paying on your mortgage and take on the banks.

reply to post by Rockpuck


what if they shred the note?? or keep such losy records, that there is really no way to know just who owns what note?? what if they disconnect the note from the deed????

this is what they mean by defective...
not that the people aren't paying on the houses...
and it will affect every home that is in the mers system, not just those who didn't pay the mortgage!!! I think that people will have a problem when they go to sell their home, and have to go see a title insurance firm, (and I would personally go and visit them myself, and not leave it to a bank, or real estate agent...) it's quite possible that the records surrounding your home is so shoddy that well, there is no way to assure that you have a valid right to sell the home!!! the title is toxic!!!

reply to post by dawnstar

what if they shred the note??

Why would they? To shred the entire Title, that would just be stupidity .. and you know, just because you lose the document of something doesn't mean you lose ownership. For instance, if you were to misplace your car's title after paying your car off you wouldn't lose your car.

or keep such losy records, that there is really no way to know just who owns what note??

That's happened. Records have been lost or in some cases destroyed. However you have to prove reasonable doubt that a bank is servicing a loan it doesn't have the right to service. Most loans the Title is in the hands of F&F and they sell collectors rights ... so you might pay BoA your mortgage, but when you try and prove they don't own your house you'd be right .. they only leased collectors rights. Hence it gets confusing finding out who "owns" the house.

what if they disconnect the note from the deed????

Say what? The Deed is the legal paper saying who owns the home and thus pays the property taxes. The Title is the proof of ownership (copy of the Deed) plus all other legal documents (Contract) The Title is splintered into pieces and the Deed remains with the owner. Usually when contesting the ownership of a mortgage it's the Deed people are after.. but someone always holds the deed, and it's not something you have to physically have because the County and the banks all have records (and so do you, you receive a copy in your Title Package) You should have all the same documents the bank has, the Deed is simply in the banks name as the registered owner. The complexity is that people think you need the physically doc, and that's never been proven. When banks sell mortgages it's often electronic, and the county receives the document detailing changes of ownership (and who is now paying taxes)

this is what they mean by defective...

Ummmm no. What he means by defective (from an investment standpoint) is negative LTV.

and I would personally go and visit them myself

Ummmm .... you have to go yourself. The contract is signed before a 3rd party "witness" ie, Title Agency. You can choose whatever company you want, you don't have to go with whatever the realtor or broker uses.

it's quite possible that the records surrounding your home is so shoddy that well, there is no way to assure that you have a valid right to sell the home!

RECORDS mean nothing. I'm married but I have no idea where my marriage certificate is or the license. Does that make it void? If only! A contracts a contract once signed, copies are everywhere. And if for some reason a copy is needed or the original is needed it might take some time but they can track it down.

Originally posted by Rockpuck
but the vast majority of foreclosures are completely legal regardless if the "real deed" is shown.

And the cops can do through your bedroom regardless of if they actually have a warrant in hteir hand, right?

I'll buy your car for a million bucks. I don't have it on me, but you'll hand me the keys, right?

If the banks lack documentation to prove ownership, they do not own it. See? Easy.

reply to post by Rockpuck


mers was created to avoid having to register the frequent transfer of ownership of the note and save money!!!
therefore, the county records aren't that accurate.....