Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Mortgage Foreclosure in Washington State by Rco Legal, P.S. and Northwest Trustee Services

    Uploaded by

    tawnyone
    115 views3 pages
    MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IN WASHINGTON STATE: If someone stole your Corvette and claimed ownership by virtue of “holding” it in their garage, wouldn't all of the circumstances, intervening parties and transfers of title leading up to its acquisition and possession by the person claiming title and ownership come into play? Certainly. However, when it comes to stealing your home or property in Washington State and elsewhere, corporate securitized Trusts argue arrogantly, “no” -- “we hold the Note and therefore we win”. The Trusts and their attorneys argue that the fraudulent securitization process and associated intervening Assignments of the note and mortgage are irrelevant, as well as all third parties to the transfers and fraud. Such is the case in Washington State in foreclosures involving Trustee THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, and its loan servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, (and attorneys RCO LEGAL, P.S. and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES). Also despite their numerous problems in the 50 states with federal regulators regarding unfair business and foreclosure practices, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING (headquartered in West Palm Beach, Florida), and its RCO LEGAL, P.S. attorneys in Washington State and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES (principal in both, attorney David Fennell) still insist on pursuing foreclosure premised on unlawful defective MERS Assignments by standing in the shadow of the foreclosing Trusts. In the nonjudicial and judicial foreclosures in Washington State, servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING is the real party pushing these foreclosures forward for foreclosing party THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON as Trustee of the Trust and other foreclosing trusts. The invalid fraudulent MERS Assignments, having been recorded in various Washington State counties by their attorneys, have conveyed nothing to the foreclosing Trust entities since MERS does not hold either the Note or Deed of Trust under Washington's Deed of Trust Act. Or so says Washington State's highest court. The Trustee of the Trust therefore lacks standing to foreclose and steal property from homeowners, as it has never been transferred the Note and Deed of Trust by MERS lawfully in the first place. Foreclosing Trustee Banks however continue singing the mantra that you as the Homeowner lack standing to challenge the recorded fraudulent invalid MERS Assignments, because the Assignment itself is either irrelevant to the foreclosure and/or the Homeowner is not a party to the fraudulent defective MERS Assignment.

    Original Title

    MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IN WASHINGTON STATE BY RCO LEGAL, P.S. AND NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IN WASHINGTON STATE: If someone stole your Corvette and claimed ownership by virtue of “holding” it in their garage, wouldn't all of the circumstances, intervening parties and transfers of title leading up to its acquisition and possession by the person claiming title and ownership come into play? Certainly. However, when it comes to stealing your home or property in Washington State and elsewhere, corporate securitized Trusts argue arrogantly, “no” -- “we hold the Note and therefore we win”. The Trusts and their attorneys argue that the fraudulent securitization process and associated intervening Assignments of the note and mortgage are irrelevant, as well as all third parties to the transfers and fraud. Such is the case in Washington State in foreclosures involving Trustee THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, and its loan servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, (and attorneys RCO LEGAL, P.S. and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES). Also despite their numerous problems in the 50 states with federal regulators regarding unfair business and foreclosure practices, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING (headquartered in West Palm Beach, Florida), and its RCO LEGAL, P.S. attorneys in Washington State and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES (principal in both, attorney David Fennell) still insist on pursuing foreclosure premised on unlawful defective MERS Assignments by standing in the shadow of the foreclosing Trusts. In the nonjudicial and judicial foreclosures in Washington State, servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING is the real party pushing these foreclosures forward for foreclosing party THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON as Trustee of the Trust and other foreclosing trusts. The invalid fraudulent MERS Assignments, having been recorded in various Washington State counties by their attorneys, have conveyed nothing to the foreclosing Trust entities since MERS does not hold either the Note or Deed of Trust under Washington's Deed of Trust Act. Or so says Washington State's highest court. The Trustee of the Trust therefore lacks standing to foreclose and steal property from homeowners, as it has never been transferred the Note and Deed of Trust by MERS lawfully in the first place. Foreclosing Trustee Banks however continue singing the mantra that you as the Homeowner lack standing to challenge the recorded fraudulent invalid MERS Assignments, because the Assignment itself is either irrelevant to the foreclosure and/or the Homeowner is not a party to the fraudulent defective MERS Assignment.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    115 views3 pages

    Mortgage Foreclosure in Washington State by Rco Legal, P.S. and Northwest Trustee Services

    Uploaded by

    tawnyone
    MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IN WASHINGTON STATE: If someone stole your Corvette and claimed ownership by virtue of “holding” it in their garage, wouldn't all of the circumstances, intervening parties and transfers of title leading up to its acquisition and possession by the person claiming title and ownership come into play? Certainly. However, when it comes to stealing your home or property in Washington State and elsewhere, corporate securitized Trusts argue arrogantly, “no” -- “we hold the Note and therefore we win”. The Trusts and their attorneys argue that the fraudulent securitization process and associated intervening Assignments of the note and mortgage are irrelevant, as well as all third parties to the transfers and fraud. Such is the case in Washington State in foreclosures involving Trustee THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, and its loan servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING, (and attorneys RCO LEGAL, P.S. and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES). Also despite their numerous problems in the 50 states with federal regulators regarding unfair business and foreclosure practices, OCWEN LOAN SERVICING (headquartered in West Palm Beach, Florida), and its RCO LEGAL, P.S. attorneys in Washington State and NORTHWEST TRUSTEE SERVICES (principal in both, attorney David Fennell) still insist on pursuing foreclosure premised on unlawful defective MERS Assignments by standing in the shadow of the foreclosing Trusts. In the nonjudicial and judicial foreclosures in Washington State, servicer OCWEN LOAN SERVICING is the real party pushing these foreclosures forward for foreclosing party THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON as Trustee of the Trust and other foreclosing trusts. The invalid fraudulent MERS Assignments, having been recorded in various Washington State counties by their attorneys, have conveyed nothing to the foreclosing Trust entities since MERS does not hold either the Note or Deed of Trust under Washington's Deed of Trust Act. Or so says Washington State's highest court. The Trustee of the Trust therefore lacks standing to foreclose and steal property from homeowners, as it has never been transferred the Note and Deed of Trust by MERS lawfully in the first place. Foreclosing Trustee Banks however continue singing the mantra that you as the Homeowner lack standing to challenge the recorded fraudulent invalid MERS Assignments, because the Assignment itself is either irrelevant to the foreclosure and/or the Homeowner is not a party to the fraudulent defective MERS Assignment.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 3

    MORTGAGE FORECLOSURE IN WASHINGTON STATE: If someone stole your Corvette and la!med o"ners#!$ %y v!rtue of &#old!n'( !t !n t#e!

    r 'ara'e) "ouldn*t all of t#e !r umstan es) !nterven!n' $art!es and transfers of t!tle lead!n' u$ to !ts a +u!s!t!on and $ossess!on %y t#e $erson la!m!n' t!tle and o"ners#!$ ome !nto $lay, Certa!nly- Ho"ever) "#en !t omes to steal!n' your #ome or $ro$erty !n Was#!n'ton State and else"#ere) or$orate se ur!t!.ed Trusts ar'ue arro'antly) &no( // &"e #old t#e Note and t#erefore "e "!n(- T#e Trusts and t#e!r attorneys ar'ue t#at t#e fraudulent se ur!t!.at!on $ro ess and asso !ated !nterven!n' Ass!'nments of t#e note and mort'a'e are !rrelevant) as "ell as all t#!rd $art!es to t#e transfers and fraudSuch is the case in Washington State in foreclosures involving Trustee THE BANK OF NEW YORK ME ON! an" its loan servicer O#WEN OAN SER$%#%N&! 'an" attorne(s R#O E&A ! )*S* an" NORTHWEST TR+STEE SER$%#ES,* Also "es-ite their nu.erous -ro/le.s in the 01 states 2ith fe"eral regulators regar"ing unfair /usiness an" foreclosure -ractices! O#WEN OAN SER$%#%N& 'hea"3uartere" in West )al. Beach! Flori"a,! an" its R#O E&A ! )*S* attorne(s in Washington State an" NORTHWEST TR+STEE SER$%#ES '-rinci-al in /oth! attorne( 4avi" Fennell, still insist on -ursuing foreclosure -re.ise" on unla2ful "efective MERS Assign.ents /( stan"ing in the sha"o2 of the foreclosing Trusts* %n the non5u"icial an" 5u"icial foreclosures in Washington State! servicer O#WEN OAN SER$%#%N& is the real -art( -ushing these foreclosures for2ar" for foreclosing -art( THE BANK OF NEW YORK ME ON as Trustee of the Trust an" other foreclosing trusts* The invali" frau"ulent MERS Assign.ents! having /een recor"e" in various Washington State counties /( their attorne(s! have conve(e" nothing to the foreclosing Trust entities since MERS "oes not hol" either the Note or 4ee" of Trust un"er Washington6s 4ee" of Trust Act* Or so sa(s Washington State6s highest court* The Trustee of the Trust therefore lac7s stan"ing to foreclose an" steal -ro-ert( fro. ho.eo2ners! as it has never /een transferre" the Note an" 4ee" of Trust /( MERS la2full( in the first -lace* Foreclosing Trustee Ban7s ho2ever continue singing the .antra that (ou as the Ho.eo2ner lac7 stan"ing to challenge the recor"e" frau"ulent invali" MERS Assign.ents! /ecause the Assign.ent itself is either irrelevant to the foreclosure an"8or the Ho.eo2ner is not a -art( to the frau"ulent "efective MERS Assign.ent* Again! % as7 the /asic 3uestion: 9%f (our #orvette 2as stolen fro. (ou in the first -lace in a frau"ulent or illegal transaction! 2oul" the intervening -ersons 2ho clai.e" an" transferre" the title to the #orvette to its current -ossessor clai.ing o2nershi- of the

    title to the #orvette have relevance:; 9Woul"n6t the original la2ful #orvette o2ner /e a -art( 2ith stan"ing to o/5ect an" in3uire as to the current -art( clai.ing o2nershi- an" -ossession concerning all intervening unla2ful title transfers an" vali"it( of title to his #orvette:; 4uh* A thief cannot transfer goo" title to -ro-ert( to another* Another argu.ent /( foreclosing Trustee /an7s is that the Ho.eo2ner is not a -art( to the )ooling an" Service Agree.ent governing the securiti<e" Trust! so the Ho.eo2ner has no stan"ing to /ring securiti<ation issues into the foreclosure -rocess* The foreclosing Trust o/5ects that it "oes not have to res-on" to an( ho.eo2ner "iscover( re3uests a/out the securiti<ation -rocess of the Note an" .ortgage! /ecause thir" -arties involve" are not -arties to the foreclosure action* 'Never .in" that the thir" -arties are the agent an" assigns of the Trust! an" that the Trust is foreclosing on the ho.eo2ner on /ehalf of all of its agents an" assigns=,* The foreclosing Trust6s legal argu.ent that 9we hold the note, therefore we win; is full of holes* This argu.ent is incongruous* Ho2 the foreclosing Trust ca.e /( the original Note! the intervening transfers an" assign.ents! an"8or 2hether the Trust is trul( the Note hol"er is the grava.en of a Ho.eo2ner6s challenge an" o/5ection to these frau"ulent foreclosures* %n a fe"eral court case recentl( in the +nite" States 4istrict #ourt! 4* Rho"e %slan" '>>8?1>@,! Eloisa #OSAAAY! )laintiff! v* MORT&A&E E E#TRON%# RE&%STRAT%ON SYSTEMS et al* 4efen"ants! t#e Homeo"ner COSA0A1 #allen'ed a MERS Ass!'nment to a se ur!t!.ed mort'a'e loan trust "#! # Ass!'nment #ad o urred outs!de of t#e t!me s$e !f!ed %y t#e se ur!t!.ed Trust for su # an Ass!'nment- BNote: The Ho.eo2ner challenge is /ase" on the 9#losing 4ate; of the Trust as state" in the )ooling an" Service Agree.ent ')SA, 2hich is the contract "ocu.ent governing the Trust* Most of these Trusts are for.e" un"er Ne2 Yor7 la2* An Assign.ent of the Note after the 9#losing 4ate; of the Trust un"er the )SA is illegal un"er the contract an" therefore invali"* Since the Trustee /an7s such as the foreclosing The Ban7 of Ne2 Yor7 Mellon 'an" Oc2en oan Servicing /ehin" the Trust, in these cases st(le the.selves as the Trustee of the Trust! the Trustee /rings all of the relevant securiti<ation issues into -la(* %n this First #ircuit #ourt of A--eals case! for eCa.-le! the challenge" MERS Assign.ent 2as on March >?! ?11DE ho2ever! the su/5ect Trust ha" close" on A-ril @1! ?11F* Thus! no ?11D Assign.ent of the .ortgage an" Note 2as -ossi/le un"er the governing )ooling an" Servicing Agree.ent contract ')SA,* The Ho.eo2ner sought a "eclaration fro. the #ourt that the Assign.ent 2as invali"! an" that therefore the 4efen"ant Trust "i" not hol" her .ortgage an" Note! an" thus 4efen"ants lac7e" stan"ing to foreclose or to enforce the Note* 'A .agistrate ha" reco..en"e" that the

    case /e "is.isse" /ecause the Ho.eo2ner lac7e" stan"ing as she 2as not a -art( to the challenge" Assign.ents,* The +*S* #ourt of A--eals for the First #ircuit re5ecte" the MagistrateGs Re-ort an" Reco..en"ation* The #ourt of A--eals thoroughl( an" re-eate"l( re5ecte" the 4efen"ant Ban76s 9lac7 of stan"ing to challenge the Assign.ent; argu.ent! citing to hol"ings fro. the +nite" States #ourt of A--eals for the First #ircuit which held that there is no principled basis for employing standing doctrine as a sword to deprive mortgagors of legal protection conferred upon them under state law, and that the Defendants argument as to an alleged lack of standing by the homeowner to challenge the assignment was extreme and incongruous. Hats off to the Honora/le Aohn A* Mc#onnell! Ar* for his i.-ortant o-inion! 2hich is 5ust one .ore in the recent line of cases -er.itting such Assign.ent challenges inclu"ing the &las7i "ecision fro. #aliforniaE the Ero/o/o "ecision fro. Ne2 Yor7E an" the %n Re Sal"ivar "ecision fro. the TeCas Ban7ru-tc( #ourt! 2hich follo2 the reasoning of the earlier Horace "ecision fro. Ala/a.a an" the Hen"ric7s "ecision fro. Michigan* Attorne( Barnes 'Nation2i"e 4efense, re-resente" the ho.eo2ner 'Hen"ric7s, 2here the #ourt grante" su..ar( 5u"g.ent to the ho.eo2ner 2hen it 2as sho2n that there 2as no co.-liance 2ith the .ortgage loan transfer -rovisions of the )SA* A Fe"eral court has cite" Hen"ric7s in another case! stating that its logic is -lausi/le* %t has ta7en several (ears of 2or7! /ut shortHsighte" +*S* courts are finall( co.ing to the light that the unifie" chant of foreclosing Trusts an" servicers such as THE BANK OF NEW YORK ME ON AS TR+STEE! O#WEN OAN SER$%#%N& 'an" its attorne( agents at R#O egal! %nc* an" North2est Trustee Services, of 9we have the note, thus we win;! no longer -revails* This is an irreconcila/le an" unsustaina/le argu.ent* There is little "istinction /et2een the theft of a #orvette fro. its o2ner! an" the theft of ho.es an" -ro-erties fro. +*S* ho.eo2ners* Ho.eo2ners have thro2n a stin7H/all into the .i""le of these foreclosures! an" it is not going to go a2a(* An(one 2ith half a /rain 7no2s 2hat B*S* isE it can /e "etecte" in a .inute* #or-orate financial institutions nee" a realit( chec7E so.eone nee"s to co.e to the conclusion that the( nee" to -ro"uce the facts* The Trusts an" loan servicers have a /igger fight ahea"* The foreclosing Trustee of the Trust 'an" loan servicer, an" their attorne(s .ust -ro"uce co.-etent -roof of the vali"it( of all of the relevant intervening MERS Assign.ents un"er the )SA an" ho2 the foreclosing -art( ca.e to hol" the Note! /efore it can /e -er.itte" to see7 the "rastic re.e"( of foreclosure on ho.eo2ners* See! also! the reference" First #ircuit "ecision -u/lishe" here in #OSAAAY v* MERS! et al*

    You might also like