You are on page 1of 7

Notice of Lis Pendens in Action to Quiet Title

By Person Claiming Title by Adverse


Possession

State of: VIRGINIA


County of: FAIRFAX
1. The undersigned, Mr. Jeffrey L. Brown and Mrs. Barbara
M. Brown (Possessors),hereby give notice that an action has been
commenced in United States District Court , Eastern District of Virginia
Alexandria Division; HSBC Mortgage Corporation (USA), 2929 Walden
Avenue Depew New York, NY 14043-2602, , (“Nominal Lender on
the Deed of Trust”), Wells Fargo Bank, N.A (Seller, Sponsor, who sold
this loan to Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation for cash), Wells
Fargo Asset Securities Corporation ( which was Depositor, who sold this
loan for cash to Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc) , Lehman
Brothers Special Financing Inc, HSBC Bank USA National Association
( which is the issuing entity which just converted the loans into
certificate and Bonds), Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc, Lehman
Brothers Inc ( who as a “securities underwriter” bought the loans for
cash from Depositor and further sold these loans as certificate and
bonds to Dealers/Agents for cash), The dealers/agents who in turn
sold these certificates and bonds to investors for cash, “HSBC Bank
USA, National Association ” as trustee for Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed
Securities 2008-AR2 Trust, MERS as computer data base company,
nor Dealers/Agents who are part of securities underwriter, as
Securities Underwriter ,had at any time relevant to the subject
matter before this Court, to the present, suffered any actual or
threatened injury as a result of the Borrower’s non-payment of
monthly payments pursuant to the original terms of the Note, nor
because of alleged default thereon, nor can any actual or
threatened injury be traced to any other proceedings in any other
court, any action involving Proof of Claim, or otherwise, and
therefore there never was any legitimate redress available to any of
these parties by a favorable decision. MERS, Mortgage Electronic
Registration System (MERS) 1818 Library Street, Suite 300 Reston, VA
20190, Stephen B. Wood, VSB # 26518, Bierman, Geesing, Ward & Wood,
LLC, 8100 Three Chopt Road, Suite 240 Richmond VA 23229,. JOHN OR
JANE DOES 1-1000 (unknown investors); JOHN ROES 1-10, being
undisclosed mortgage aggregators (Wholesalers), mortgage originators,

1
loan seller, Trustee of Pooled Assets, Trustee for holders of certificates of
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, MERS et al (e.g., Civil Action No
1:10cv1427) in US District Court, Eastern District of Virginia by the
undersigned, to quiet title to the following described real property: 3130
Barbara Lane, Fairfax, Virginia 22031

LOT 5-A, OAK SPRING VILLAGE, SUBDIVISION KNOWN AS the


same appears duly dedicated, Platted and recorded in Deed
Book 5645, at page 705, a re-subdivided portion of Lots 5
and 6, OAK SPRING VILLAGE, as duly platted and recorded in
Deed Book 770 at Page 455, among the land records of
Fairfax County, Virginia. among the Land Records of Fairfax
County, Virginia.

2. The undersigned’s loan was sold multi times in illegal


securitization as un-registered and un-regulated security as
under;
HSBS Mortgage Corporationà Wells Fargo Bank, N.Aà Wells Fargo
Asset Securities Corporationà Lehman Brothers Special Financing
Inc.à Lehman Brothers IncàDealersàAgentsà
Investors( Prospectus Supplement 424(b)5 SEC file # 333-143751-
13, Accession # 1193125-8-38785, filed on 02/26/2008 at 4:48PM
ET)

3. HSBC Mortgage Corporation (USA), 2929 Walden Avenue Depew


New York, NY 14043-2602, , (“Nominal Lender on the Deed of
Trust”), Wells Fargo Bank, N.A (Seller, Sponsor, who sold this loan to
Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation for cash), Wells Fargo Asset
Securities Corporation ( which was Depositor, who sold this loan for
cash to Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc) , Lehman Brothers
Special Financing Inc, HSBC Bank USA National Association ( which
is the issuing entity which just converted the loans into certificate
and Bonds), Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc, Lehman
Brothers Inc ( who as a “securities underwriter” bought the loans for
cash from Depositor and further sold these loans as certificate and
bonds to Dealers/Agents for cash), The dealers/agents who in turn
sold these certificates and bonds to investors for cash, “HSBC Bank
USA, National Association ” as trustee for Wells Fargo Mortgage
Backed Securities 2008-AR2 Trust, MERS as computer data base
company, nor Dealers/Agents who are part of securities underwriter,
as Securities Underwriter,. JOHN OR JANE DOES 1-1000 (unknown
investors); JOHN ROES 1-10, being undisclosed mortgage aggregators
(Wholesalers), mortgage originators, loan seller, Trustee of Pooled Assets,

2
Trustee for holders of certificates of Collateralized Mortgage Obligations,
MERS et al ; (e.g., Civil Action (list of names of known defendants), and all
other persons unknown, claiming any right, title, estate, lien or interest in
the said real property. The undersigned further gives notice that he has
been in actual, exclusive, and adverse possession of such property within
the meaning of:-
a. This case arises out of Defendants’ egregious and ongoing and far
reaching fraudulent Schemes for improper use of Plaintiff’s identity,
fraud in the inducement, fraud in the Factum, fraud in the
Execution, usury, and breaches of contractual and fiduciary
obligations as Mortgagee or “Trustee” on the Deed of Trust,
“Mortgage Brokers,” “Loan Originators,” “Loan Seller”, “Mortgage
Aggregator,” “Trustee of Pooled Assets”, “Trustee or officers of
Structured Investment Vehicle”, “Investment Banker”, “Trustee of
Special Purpose Vehicle/Issuer of Certificates of ‘Asset-backed
Certificates’”, “Seller of ‘Asset-Backed’ Certificates (shares or
bonds),” “Special Servicer” and Trustee, respectively, of certain
mortgage loans pooled together in a trust fund. The participants in
the securitization scheme have devised business plans to reap
millions of dollars in profits at the expense of Plaintiffs
(undersigneds) and other investors in certain trust funds. The
Trustees who have filed notices of default predicated on a “MERS
Deed of Trust” are liable for slander of title. Putative Deed Of trust
in which MERS is named as nominal beneficiary, results in fraud in
the execution.
b. MERS act of assigning the mortgage instrument was invalid as it
held no beneficial interest in the mortgage instrument for two
reasons: 1) a security instrument, apart from the promissory note
giving rise to the debt has no value because there is no debt by
which it secures payment; and 2) MERS had no beneficial interest in
the mortgage instrument that it could assign.
c. In Carpenter v. Longan, 16 Wall. 271, 83 U.S. 271, 274, 21 L.Ed. 313
(1872), the U.S. Supreme Court stated “The note and
mortgage are inseparable; the former as essential, the
latter as an incident. An assignment of the note carries the
mortgage with it, while an assignment of the latter alone is
a nullity.” assigning the mortgage instrument was invalid as it held
no beneficial interest in the mortgage instrument for two reasons:
1) a security instrument, apart from the promissory note
giving rise to the debt has no value because there is no debt
by which it secures payment; and 2) MERS had no beneficial
interest in the mortgage instrument that it could assign. An
assignment of the note carries the mortgage with it, while an
assignment of the latter alone is a nullity.”[Note that this does
not include a nominee like MERS. There is a reason for that.
The legislature intended to create certainty in contracts and
actions on contracts. Using a nominee immediately creates
the question of agency. The question of agency immediately
raises the question of "who is the principal?" As long as that

3
question exists, this statute is violated. If this statue is
violated the deed of trust is void.]
d. Note also that without an accounting for third party
payments to the creditor in the securitization chain who has
succeeded to the position of beneficiary BECAUSE THE
SUCCESSION IS SHOWN IN THE COUNTY RECORDS, is
voidable because the amount is incorrect, which is a
question of fact that must be judicially resolved, which is
why NO NON-JUDICIAL sale of securitized property is
appropriate.]
e. A creditor is not a creditor unless they are owed something.
A beneficiary is not a beneficiary unless they are a creditor.
In the case of a mortgage note, a beneficiary is not a
creditor unless it is the obligee on the note (i.e., the one to
whom the note directs payment). There is no escaping this
logic. The beneficiary must be an obligee of the secured obligation
(usually the payee of a note), because otherwise the deed of
trust in its favor is meaningless. Watkins v. Bryant (1891) 91
C 492, 27 P 775; Nagle v Macy (1858) 9 C 426
f. The practical effect of splitting the deed of trust from the
promissory note is to make it impossible for the holder of
the note to foreclose, without the agency relationship, the
person holding only the note lacks the power to foreclose in
the event of default. The person holding only the deed of
trust will never experience default because only the holder
of the note is entitled to payment of the underlying
obligation. The mortgage loan becomes ineffectual when
the note holder did not also hold the deed of trust.” Bellistri
v. Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, 284 S.W.3d 619, 623 (Mo.
App. 2009)
g. MERS(Mortgage Electronic Registration System Inc. is beneficiary
on Deed of Trust, this makes Deed of Trust unlawful. MERS
cannot be holder in due course, MERS is a break in the chain of
Title and is Deed of Trust is void
h. The creation of two entities to exercise collection and
foreclosure instead of one thus reinforcing the argument of
financial double jeopardy. The MERS deed would therefore
be void, Thus there would be no security, probably no note
and maybe no obligation either if the “Lender” was paid in
full at closing by a third party in the securitization chain or
if the derivative products were sold and insured.
i. MERS as beneficiary on Deed of Trust is a Portal between two
Universes of Commercial Law (Negotiable instrument) and Mortgage
Law; There is NO Trust, No Corpus, No Trust. The customized form
of Mortgage deed utilized by the Mortgage Electronic Registrations
Systems Inc., (MERS), Paragraph C and the grantee clause in
particular, is not entitled to any of the statutory mortgagee
protections provided. A “Nominee” “Mortgagee” is simply not
entitled to the statutory benefits. Those provisions are strictly
construed against MERS putative conveyance since the

4
statutory provisions are in derogation of common law. For
example, MERS mortgagee deeds have two entities
exercising the same statutory foreclosure powers
j. When MERS is on the Deed of Trust then there is No Corpus,
No Trust,(1). There must be clear intention to create a trust
(2). There must be a Trustor/Granter to create Trust (3).
There must be a Trust Corpus or assets ( 4). There must be
duties assigned to Trustee (5). There must be ASCERTAINED
or ASERTAINABLE, beneficiaries 0r put another way, there is
no such thing as a "STRAW" or "nominal" beneficiary and,
without ASERTAINED or ASCERTAINABLE Beneficiaries the
trust Instrument is VOID.( 6). Without Promissory note
(Asset & Corpus) there cannot be a valid trust and without a
valid Trust there is no longer need for any security called
Deed of Trust. Corpus of the Trust is not there. (7). The
Deed of Trust is a Trust Instrument and as such must meet
certain criteria to be valid.SO IF THERE IS NO CORPUS NO
TRUST
k. The undersigned has filed affirmative defenses for set off violations
to the Truth in Lending Act, and a counterclaim for damages for
RICO, TILA violations, usury, fraud in the inducement and fraud in
the execution, damages for appraisal fraud, quiet title, and
malicious abuse of process among other causes of action. This
includes the undisclosed purchase of insurance that qualifies as
mortgage insurance, credit default swaps that qualify as mortgage
insurance, and guarantees from third parties, including but not
limited to the mortgagors whose negotiable instruments were also
assigned to tranches that had lower priority than that which the
subject loan transaction was assigned, and the payments made by
plaintiff were in fact allocated and given not to the holder in due
course of the subject mortgage and note, but to the CDO manager
for allocation to tranches and securities which held a higher place in
the hierarchy of the tranches within the SPV.
l. The note was separated from the mortgage then the mortgage is
unenforceable by definition. If the mortgage is unenforceable by
definition then any “foreclosure sale” is void. Thus a cloud on title
exists even in the presence of the Court’s Judgment to the contrary.
m. There was Fraud in the Factum since securitizations often are
involved. The truth is that there was fraud in the Factum. The
Defendants filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(SEC) shows interconnected and affiliated parties that aided and
abetted a pattern of fraud by the originating lender and, thus, trust
cannot acquire the rights of a holder-in-due-course per U.C.C.§ 3-
203 (b). To use participation theories, we must show that financial
institutions providing lending capital for a predatory lending scheme
are dictating loan terms or, at least, are aware of the predatory
characteristics of the loans (England v. MG Investments, Inc., 93
F. Supp. 2d 718 (S.D. W.Va 2000)). Such information may be found
in the 8K and 10K filings with the SEC. For example, a federal
district Court held that the Wall Street underwriters (Lehman

5
Brothers) for a predatory lender could be liable to injured
consumers on an aiding and abetting theory where consumer allege
that the underwriter knew of the lender’s fraud and provided
substantial assistance to the lender’s scheme (Aiello v. Chisik,
2002 U.S. Dist. Lexis 5858 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 10, 2002) ). Proving such a
fraud can be a good defense to fight a trust’s claims to be holder-in-
due-course or claims of having the “rights” of holder-in-due-course.
n. Bidders and third parties without notice could easily be sued in
foreclosure by the real holders in due course thus either
encumbering their property with the mortgage which the Court had
intended to extinguish through the foreclosure sale, or losing the
property for which they paid out of their own funds or through the
lending and mortgage of yet another financial institution who will
also be subject to losing its security and suffer a partial or complete
loss on a loan where the risks were not apparent because of the
fraud of HSBC Mortgage Corporation (USA), 2929 Walden
Avenue Depew New York, NY 14043-2602, , (“Nominal Lender
on the Deed of Trust”), Wells Fargo Bank, N.A (Seller, Sponsor,
who sold this loan to Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation
for cash), Wells Fargo Asset Securities Corporation ( which was
Depositor, who sold this loan for cash to Lehman Brothers
Special Financing Inc) , Lehman Brothers Special Financing
Inc, HSBC Bank USA National Association ( which is the issuing
entity which just converted the loans into certificate and
Bonds), Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc, Lehman
Brothers Inc ( who as a “securities underwriter” bought the
loans for cash from Depositor and further sold these loans as
certificate and bonds to Dealers/Agents for cash), The
dealers/agents who in turn sold these certificates and bonds
to investors for cash, “HSBC Bank USA, National Association ”
as trustee for Wells Fargo Mortgage Backed Securities 2008-
AR2 Trust, MERS as computer data base company, nor
Dealers/Agents who are part of securities underwriter, as
Securities Underwriter,. JOHN OR JANE DOES 1-1000 (unknown
investors); JOHN ROES 1-10, being undisclosed mortgage
aggregators (Wholesalers), mortgage originators, loan seller,
Trustee of Pooled Assets, Trustee for holders of certificates of
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, MERS et al, MERS, Mortgage
Electronic Registration System (MERS) 1818 Library Street, Suite
300 Reston, VA 20190, Stephen B. Wood, VSB # 26518, Bierman,
Geesing, Ward & Wood, LLC, 8100 Three Chopt Road, Suite 240
Richmond VA 23229, Equity Trustee LLC,. JOHN OR JANE DOES 1-
1000 (unknown investors); JOHN ROES 1-10, being undisclosed
mortgage aggregators (Wholesalers), mortgage originators, loan
seller, Trustee of Pooled Assets, Trustee for holders of certificates of
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, MERS et al (e.g., Civil Action
(list of names of known defendants), and all other persons unknown,
claiming any right, title, estate, lien or interest in the said real

6
property. etal.. These entities used fake, fabricated and illegal
affidavits/assignments of individuals, who were wearing too many
hats for the financial and non-financial institutions and their
signatures on each of the assignment/ affidavit are not identical.
These all entities are misleading the court and thus committing the
fraud upon courts in stealing the homes of the people.

END OF WRITING

Possession for a period of twenty one (21) years and three (3)months

Witness my signature this the _____ day

of______________________________, 2011.

______________________________________________________________________________
POSSESSOR POSSESSOR
Jeffrey L. Brown Barbara M. Brown
3130 Barbara Lane 3130 Barbara Lane
Fairfax, VA 22031 Fairfax, VA 22031

STATE OF _____________________________________
COUNTY OF ____________________________
Personally appeared before me, the undersigned authority in and for the said
County and State, on this _____ day of ____________________________,
20____,within my jurisdiction, the within named_Jeffrey and Barbara Brown
who acknowledged and executed the above and foregoing instrument.

____________________________________
NOTARY PUBLIC

My Commission Expires: SEAL


______________________

You might also like