Wednesday, February 2, 2011

Court ruled Bank of America can continue foreclosures once more in Nevada

A court ruled Bank of America can continue (FRAUD) foreclosures once more in Nevada.  Last week I had reported a court halted all Bank of America foreclosures there.  But it seems there may have been a huge amount of pressure on a judge to rule for Bank of America.

This is sad news, since all their foreclosures are based on fraud.

I would advise anyone with Bank of America or any MERS loan who is facing foreclosure to fight it!

Portion of Article:

After being involved in the recent ‘robo-signing scandal’ and foreclosure debates, Bank of America Corporation (NYSE:BAC) has finally received approval from the court to continue operations in Nevada.

5 comments:

  1. We're going to try in Idaho, but it appears the banksters own the judicial system. All we need is a judge with integrity, could be hard to come buy! sarcasm intended.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Sherrie-
    If you can tell who "anonymous" above is, please send them my email address. We need to get together!
    We just learned that the judges are now awarding legal fees against those who file injunctions. They are really trying to close all the loop holes. I am telling you what, I believe we are the practice cases so that the legal system is sewn up tight when this shit REALLY hits the fan, n 20-25 years. Then everyone will want to see their note, won't they? This is a slow motion land grab, they want all titles so clouded that the only "solution" is to do away with property ownership...
    My state legislator never called back. Oh well, I tried.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have no idea who they are. I thought it was you, who posted it, because of Idaho. I have no way of knowing who posts what comment.

    But, the Idaho person, please email me. Claire is also going to try for it in Idaho.

    my email address is - sherriequestioningall at yahoo.com

    Thanks

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dozens of putative MERS foreclosure class actions filed in the federal courts were transferred, by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (the “JPML”), to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona (the “MDL court”).

    On September 30, 2010, the MDL court dismissed, for failure to state a claim, numerous challenges to MERS’ role in the foreclosure process.

    The MDL court’s decision reaffirmed MERS’ role in non-judicial foreclosures, and held that plaintiffs asserting challenges to property foreclosures must plead the absence of payment default as an element of their claim.

    Defendants in six of the putative class actions transferred to the MDL court—four governed by Nevada law, one governed by California law and
    one governed by Arizona law—filed motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On
    September 30, 2010, the MDL court granted each of these motions in their entirety.

    The MDL court held that the complaints had failed to state a claim for the tort of wrongful foreclosure under Nevada law, for two reasons. First, the court held that plaintiffs had failed to allege that they were current on their loan obligations.

    The court’s ruling indicates that borrowers who are unable to allege that they were timely paying their obligations will not be able to pursue affirmative claims for wrongful non-judicial foreclosure based upon “splitting the note” theories or other challenges to MERS’ status as mortgagee.

    ReplyDelete
  5. . . .

    Guess what ... do you really believe that judges, who are heavily invested in the banking scam, are going to actually HELP YOU in an OFFENSIVE action against the banksters?!

    Get REAL!

    The way to win is a carefully and shrewdly planned and executed aggressive series of pertinent inquiries, (interrogatories), in DISCOVERY, when the banksters take the offense; or use a "Qualified Written Request" for answers to discovery questions BEFORE the banksters start their foreclosure action.

    After the battle is joined, the right questions asked will establish YOUR case for wrongful foreclosure.

    And not only that, here are some thoughts on why it is NOT unjust enrichment for YOU to keep your property . . .

    From A PRIMER ON MONEY, SUBCOMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC FINANCE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 88th Congress, 2d Session, AUGUST 5, 1964, [44-985 O-65-7, p89]

    ". . . as we have pointed out, BANKS CREATE MONEY WITHOUT COST TO THEMSELVES, . . ." (Emphasis added).

    http://www.scribd.com/document_downloads/18077819?extension=pdf [GOTO PDF page 89].

    The original bankster transaction was funded by using the prospective property (collateral) and the ORIGINAL promissory note and mortgage agreement (PN&MA) as if the property and the PN&MA already belonged to the bankster.

    So, if the bankster used YOUR PN&MA, as money, to fund the bank check issued on the face value amount of the PN&MA, AT NO COST TO THE BANK, without NOTICE to the issuer of the PN&MA, YOU, and without fully disclosing these facts of the transaction, the bankster committed a Deceptive Practice, False Representation, and Fraud.

    If, after committing the fraud noted above, a bankster comes up with an argument about “unjust enrichment” to the so-called “debtor” if foreclosure is nullified, here is some information you should know:

    1. Demand the bankster provide opportunity to inspect the ORIGINAL PN&MA.

    1(a). the banksters cannot produce the ORIGINALS; they will come up with some lame excuse for not being able to provide an opportunity to inspect ORIGINALS. Then, WHO OWNS THE PN&MA?

    2. Demand production of ALL certified documentation purported to evidence a valid ASSIGNMENT.

    2(a). Any document the bankster produces can be de-constructed to show that they are fraudulent and that there is actually no VALID ASSIGNMENT of the ORIGINAL PN&MA in existence, (the banksters always make INVALID assignments).

    3. Demand disclosure of:
    The identity of the actual SOURCE of the money
    Where did the money come from?
    WHO provided it?
    What account was it paid out of?

    4. Did the bankster SELL (negotiate) the ORIGINAL PN&MA?
    Together?
    Separately?

    5. If the bankster SOLD (negotiated) the PN&MA
    What was the SALE PRICE?
    WHO BOUGHT the PN&MA?
    WHO got the money from the SALE of the PN&MA?

    Get ANSWERS to these interrogatories and you will have a case to nullify foreclosure and institute a QUIET TITLE ACTION.

    6. You will KNOW that the bankster provided NO MONEY, NOTHING OF VALUE, RISKED NOTHING OF VALUE, equal to the property which is the subject of the foreclosure.

    7. You will KNOW that YOU have made numerous investments, in the form of so-called PAYMENTS that represented hours, days, weeks, months, and years of your LIFE, a VALUE much greater than the ZERO value put into the property by the bankster.

    8. For the bankster to deprive YOU of the property into which YOU have invested a significant portion of YOUR LIFE, the bankster, making NO VALUABLE contribution WHATSOEVER to the value of that property, is an UNJUST ENRICHMENT IN FAVOR OF THE BANKSTER.

    9. If the bankster insists upon foreclosure, the bankster must be compelled to disgorge (pay to YOU) ALL monies paid to the bank because of the existence of YOUR PN&MA which you were fraudulently induced to execute.

    . . .

    ReplyDelete