Bagels at a Bar Mitzvah
- Thread starter isisis
- Start date
Happy New Year To ALL!
Update: Boy, was this quick. Made settlement on Monday. Servicing was transferred on Thursday! Guess I should start studying Fannie....
Update: Rental companies are just as messed up as servicers. In order to get my security deposit back, they're coming out to inspect the vacant house. They step one foot on MY property, I will call the cops! LMAO.
Update: Boy, was this quick. Made settlement on Monday. Servicing was transferred on Thursday! Guess I should start studying Fannie....
Update: Rental companies are just as messed up as servicers. In order to get my security deposit back, they're coming out to inspect the vacant house. They step one foot on MY property, I will call the cops! LMAO.
Given the wreckage created by mortgage servicing modifications negligence has predictably become an issue in litigation and a confusing one with courts split both ways. Banks claim there's no cause of action due to the lack of a duty of care between a financial institution and a borrower which is deemed to be an arm's length transaction. This thinking appears to leave a homeowner upstream without a paddle with a wrong without a remedy.
It's had me befuddled for some time now because obviously a borrower signing a legally enforceable agreement that places the lender in a position of discretion and that allows the confiscation of property if specified events don't occur is far from an arm's length arrangement. Instead it's a contract that includes duties on both parties.
Then came along Conroy v Wells Fargo in 2017 with amici curiae from a bundle of consumer law groups as well as then Attorney General Kamala Harris in support of homeowners and they got shot down. I'm not even too pissed about it because well, they were wrong or at least didn't really do their homework and the court called them out on it.
I'd been wondering when someone was going to notice a key issue here and the Conroy court finally did and provided a handy explanation. It involves the Biakanja factors (Biakanja v. Irving (1958) 49 Cal.2d 647 [320 P.2d 16] that are used to determine the existence of a duty of care. What people had been overlooking is they are only applicable in the absence of privity. I'd noticed it and wondered why it wasn't addressed. Privity is the relationship created by a contract which brings with it various duties similar to a duty of care, e.g., the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Conroy ruled that negligence isn't an applicable remedy because a remedy is already available: breach of contract.
They didn't completely foreclose a remedy in tort for misconduct, they just raised the bar a bit by requiring the conduct to be intentional rather than careless.
I like this ruling because it makes sense and things fall into place, well sort of.... but I like it for another reason as well. These legal experts overlooked an essential element of the strange and screwy relationship created by mortgage companies in their eagerness to avoid liability: there's no contract between a borrower and a mortgage servicer. The contract is between the borrower and the lender, the servicer is acting as agent and without privity. Therefore the lender incurred liability for the negligent actions of their agent under contract and the agent in their individual capacity may have incurred liability under tort.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12935210887321900074&hl=en&as_sdt=2006
It's had me befuddled for some time now because obviously a borrower signing a legally enforceable agreement that places the lender in a position of discretion and that allows the confiscation of property if specified events don't occur is far from an arm's length arrangement. Instead it's a contract that includes duties on both parties.
Then came along Conroy v Wells Fargo in 2017 with amici curiae from a bundle of consumer law groups as well as then Attorney General Kamala Harris in support of homeowners and they got shot down. I'm not even too pissed about it because well, they were wrong or at least didn't really do their homework and the court called them out on it.
I'd been wondering when someone was going to notice a key issue here and the Conroy court finally did and provided a handy explanation. It involves the Biakanja factors (Biakanja v. Irving (1958) 49 Cal.2d 647 [320 P.2d 16] that are used to determine the existence of a duty of care. What people had been overlooking is they are only applicable in the absence of privity. I'd noticed it and wondered why it wasn't addressed. Privity is the relationship created by a contract which brings with it various duties similar to a duty of care, e.g., the covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
Conroy ruled that negligence isn't an applicable remedy because a remedy is already available: breach of contract.
They didn't completely foreclose a remedy in tort for misconduct, they just raised the bar a bit by requiring the conduct to be intentional rather than careless.
I like this ruling because it makes sense and things fall into place, well sort of.... but I like it for another reason as well. These legal experts overlooked an essential element of the strange and screwy relationship created by mortgage companies in their eagerness to avoid liability: there's no contract between a borrower and a mortgage servicer. The contract is between the borrower and the lender, the servicer is acting as agent and without privity. Therefore the lender incurred liability for the negligent actions of their agent under contract and the agent in their individual capacity may have incurred liability under tort.
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=12935210887321900074&hl=en&as_sdt=2006
Happy New Year to everybody. 2020 was an easy year to forget. I lost my case on appeal and then denied by the SC. I know why they did not want to issue an opinion. Because if my case were published, the Oregon state courts would become the laughingstock of the nation. Can you image higher courts saying that it’s perfectly legal to commit misrepresentation and fraud by printing your own note then use the name of a trust to steal from their own constituents who pay them and bailed out the banks in the first place? By keeping the case unpublished only us know and laugh at them. Sort of like Gohmert saying Pence can pick a president. What a dummy. If that the case why 150 million people bother to vote, just leave it up to Pence. And this guy is a congressman from Texas?
anyway, my camper van is almost fully built. The last thing I want to do is to put a pop top roof on it. I am thinking about naming it “freedom”. Any suggestion.
Wish everybody a healthy 2021.
anyway, my camper van is almost fully built. The last thing I want to do is to put a pop top roof on it. I am thinking about naming it “freedom”. Any suggestion.
Wish everybody a healthy 2021.
Ok all,
I know we're in various stages of business, but I really could use some help from the research gurus in here. Some of you have my email, please get in touch with me if you're a whiz at research. I am looking for a specific affidavit used in foreclosures, signed by a specific person. I really could use a little help on this because time is quite short. I have a theory and I need additional examples of this one person's handiwork to prove it.
If you're able and willing to lend a hand but don't have my email, please comment in here or message me on this forum. Thanks!
I know we're in various stages of business, but I really could use some help from the research gurus in here. Some of you have my email, please get in touch with me if you're a whiz at research. I am looking for a specific affidavit used in foreclosures, signed by a specific person. I really could use a little help on this because time is quite short. I have a theory and I need additional examples of this one person's handiwork to prove it.
If you're able and willing to lend a hand but don't have my email, please comment in here or message me on this forum. Thanks!
About the “Red House”, the investor who bought the house at auction probable got scared shitless when he knew he was dealing with a bunch of armed activists. Imagine we all March to houses of the top crooks.
While I'm great at research.... this is way too vague. Are we discussing an affidavit of amount due, affidavit of lost note, affidavit of facts, assignment of mortgage? PM me, but a great way to find more documents would be to search for other homeowners in a bankruptcy case or public records who are serviced/handled by the same servicer or document processing company.
I kind of agree with OHM. I have a feeling that in the Ohio case, HSBC although named as Plaintiff was not the real party behind the suit, titled eventually conveyed to "IFLIP PROPERTIES LLC" , a distressed debt buyer, a game played out everyday. Just like HELOC, HSBC sold the discharged debt to some scumbag debt buyer on the cheap, then this scumbag so-called investor hired attorneys using the name of HSBC to foreclose then eventually transferred the title to them so they can bag the profit. Debt collection game. I know this because I have an HSBC HELOC, and the debt collector forged the note and try the same game with me. I told them " I am ready for you sucker, sue me". I would not be surprised if the judges are partners in those LLCs. Scheme to transfer wealth from the middle class to the investor class.
Ocwen unable to reach an agreement with CFPB, market cap went down 8%, 21 mills (used to be a multi-billion dollar company before the fraud was exposed).
finance.yahoo.com
Wonder how much of mortgage servicing fraud federal suit affect the market cap when it is made public?
Ocwen Financial Comments on Conclusion of Mediation With the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., Jan. 06, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Ocwen Financial Corporation (NYSE: OCN) (“Ocwen” or the “Company”), a leading non-bank mortgage servicer and originator, today issued the following statement in response to the mediator’s notice that the Company’s court-ordered mediation...
Wonder how much of mortgage servicing fraud federal suit affect the market cap when it is made public?
Yes, I have uncovered good research perusing other jurisdictions finding cases using the same banks contemporaneously. The one caveat is that quite a few public data bases now require subscriptions since homeowners discovered and uncovered all these robosigners.
Just found something I've been searching for a long time. I kept thinking there had to be a civil law correlation to criminal law's prohibition in selling stolen goods. This is pretty close.
Duff v. Engelberg, 237 Cal. App. 2d 505, 47 Cal. Rptr. 114 (Ct. App. 1965).
"Each participant in the wrongful act is responsible as a joint tortfeasor for all damages ensuing from the wrong. ..." The court also stated (on p. 150): "... In the various California cases wherein damages have been awarded or injunctive relief granted for unjustifiable interference with contractual relations, it is apparent that the plaintiff is not confined to an action ex contractu against the party with whom he contracted." See also dictum in Swift v. Beaty (1954) 39 Tenn.App. 292 [282 S.W.2d 655], which states at page 659 [282 S.W.2d]: "[A] person's liability in tort for wrongfully inducing the breach of a contract is in no way affected by the [237 Cal. App. 2d 508] fact that the injured party also has a right of action in contract against the defaulting party to the contract."
This sort of thing can be useful in showing that the servicers can't be held blameless just because they didn't begin the misconduct but did participate in it later on.
Duff v. Engelberg, 237 Cal. App. 2d 505, 47 Cal. Rptr. 114 (Ct. App. 1965).
"Each participant in the wrongful act is responsible as a joint tortfeasor for all damages ensuing from the wrong. ..." The court also stated (on p. 150): "... In the various California cases wherein damages have been awarded or injunctive relief granted for unjustifiable interference with contractual relations, it is apparent that the plaintiff is not confined to an action ex contractu against the party with whom he contracted." See also dictum in Swift v. Beaty (1954) 39 Tenn.App. 292 [282 S.W.2d 655], which states at page 659 [282 S.W.2d]: "[A] person's liability in tort for wrongfully inducing the breach of a contract is in no way affected by the [237 Cal. App. 2d 508] fact that the injured party also has a right of action in contract against the defaulting party to the contract."
This sort of thing can be useful in showing that the servicers can't be held blameless just because they didn't begin the misconduct but did participate in it later on.
Good idea, More Trouble. I think I'll join you there. With both of us joining the group I bet we can heat things up a bit.
I'm in that group too. It’s a good group but very very scattered with different types of ideas, issues, etc. And Just be careful as you can’t trust everyone in FB as you can in this Small group here.
Thanks Java for the advice. Come to think of it, I have nothing to lose. Came here 47 years ago with nothing. And I hate this house.
We still have to write to Biden and Harris and their appointees at CPFB, DOJ, FTC, SEC, and the FBI (and senators) that the Obama's policy that favored the investors (distressed debt buyers) over the home owners was responsible for 73,000 swing votes that elected the disastrous Trump in the first place (a lot of these 73K votes surely came from the 10 millions foreclosed homeowners). There are only a few debt buyers but millions of us and there will be another election in 2 years, and 2 years... That would keep them in perspective.
We still have to write to Biden and Harris and their appointees at CPFB, DOJ, FTC, SEC, and the FBI (and senators) that the Obama's policy that favored the investors (distressed debt buyers) over the home owners was responsible for 73,000 swing votes that elected the disastrous Trump in the first place (a lot of these 73K votes surely came from the 10 millions foreclosed homeowners). There are only a few debt buyers but millions of us and there will be another election in 2 years, and 2 years... That would keep them in perspective.
Run the other way from that group. Seriously. AAF is run by some dangerous and shady people who play lots of games, steal identities of others, and hide behind all sorts of nonsense. I'm not kidding. AAF has been around a long time and is affiliated with AXJ. AXJ was founded by an Australian man named John Aster who confessed to possessing a ton of child porn.
I have had conversations with AAF "members" that claimed they were part of the Templar Knights--which existed hundreds of years ago. Some of these guys are of very questionable mental makeup, and that's putting it nicely. I cannot find a single person that they legitimately helped. Even their names are often fake. One such person often goes by John Asturias some of the time. Without my permission, at one time I was listed as one of their managing people for some of their sites. I did not create the sites, but my name was put on them. They even tried to claim that my profile was being cloned "By the FBI", and pointed to a relative's profile with similar name to mine. They are VERY questionable...
See the above post. I joined that group long ago and do not participate there nowadays because of the nonsense they have carried out. Be careful...
Please do write, but don't expect anything good in return. Both parties are in bed with big business, because of the $$$. Neither one will risk its cash cow for little old you and me. Check this:
Top Donors to Biden 2020 Campaign
The Democratic president-elect has hedge fund managers, real estate tycoons, and Hollywood moguls among his major donors.
"The biggest industries represented among Biden donors this cycle overall are Finance, Securities & Investment, and Education. "
Finance, Securities and investment? yep, those are his buddies. And they own him now because of their $$$.
Wall Street donors line up behind Biden in massive third-quarter fundraising haul
Joe Biden's fundraising committees benefited from big money contributions from finance leaders on Wall Street and across the country during the third quarter.
"Biden Action also saw large contributions from leaders at Blackstone, JPMorgan Chase, The Carlyle Group and Kohlberg Kravis & Roberts, among other firms. The Biden Action Fund raised more than $4 million from those in the finance industry in the third quarter of 2020. The fund raised over $30 million overall last quarter. "
JPM Chase? Yeah, Biden's not going to help us.