Thursday, October 20, 2011

Calling ALL Class Action Lawyers - GET GOING! Here is your ruling - Mass. Supreme Court Ruling: ALL PREVIOUS FORECLOSURES ILLEGAL AND NOT VALID, No legal title transferred! DO NOT BUY A FORECLOSURE!

Update - 10/21/11 - Mass Sussex County Register of Deeds Calling for HALT of All foreclosures - Mass.AG Coakley Suing banks for Foreclosure Fraud

I have said this a few times here! DO NOT BUY A FORECLOSURE!  They have not been legal, due to the Banks foreclosing on them ILLEGALLY!


I wrote about the Mass. Supreme Court to rule on previous foreclosures back in January of this year.

Here is a portion of that post:
Now  they are going to rule on another case of a buyers right to the property, that was illegally foreclosed on by a MERS bank.

A lower Massachusetts court had already ruled against the buyer of a foreclosure, saying they had no right to the property, due to being foreclosed on fraudulently by a MERS bank.

That court case is now going to the Supreme Court, as the buyer is trying to keep the property he purchased 3 years ago from the bank.

Imagine if the Supreme Court rules against the buyer, as the lower court has done....... I can see a whole new area of law suits, when buyers start losing their money and property of foreclosures they have purchased.  Besides that, I can't imagine there will be much of a market for foreclosures, as they may become impossible to sell, as no title insurance company will touch them.

Bloomberg is the one even carrying the story, which is amazing they would let people know they may have a huge problem if they have purchased a foreclosure in the past.

This ruling from Massachusetts will be important all around the country.  There are already class actions that have started in a few states for previous foreclosures.  If the Massachusetts Supreme Court rules the buyer of the home has no right to the property fraudulently foreclosed on, we can expect a whole rush of class actions throughout the country against the banks.


I also posted warning all buyers of property - DO NOT BUY A FORECLOSURE AS I BELIEVED CLASS ACTIONS WOULD START THIS YEAR FOR ALL HOMEOWNERS FORECLOSED ON! 

Portion from post:
I believe we will be seeing Class Action Suits in All the States against MERS and ALL MERS Servicers and Banks this year!  Once that happens, you can be assured ALL Title Insurance companies will not even touch insuring the title of ANY foreclosure!

What does that mean to investors who buy foreclosures?  Means you may possibly be out money and a house after it is all said and done (then you can start your own lawsuits)!  But besides that banks will have trouble even selling foreclosures in the future, if Class Actions start!  Who in their right mind would buy a foreclosure, if there are lawsuits and the all MERS foreclosures were done through FRAUD?!

So............ Just something for all the investors to think about!  I would not touch a foreclosure with a 10 foot pole, even if it was 1/4 the price of the market value!

Yesterday they ruled and have upheld THE BUYER of a piece of property from 3 years ago, has NO RIGHTS TO THE PROPERTY!

Zerohedge has a great article on it and explains it all. 

Portion:


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.
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.


The Massachusetts SJC is one of the most respected high courts in the country, other supreme courts look to these decisions for guidance, and would find it difficult to rule any other way in their own states. It is a precedent. It's an important precedent.


Here are the key components of the Bevilacqua case:


1. In holding that Bevilacqua could not make "something from nothing" (bring an action or even have standing to bring an action, when he had a title worth nothing) the lower land court applied and upheld long-standing principles of conveyance.


2. A foreclosure conducted by a non-mortgagee (which includes basically all of them over the last five years, including the landmark Ibanez case) is wholly void and passes no title to a subsequent transferee (purchasers of foreclosures will be especially pleased to learn of this)


3. Where (as in Bevilacqua) a non-mortgagee records a post-foreclosure assignment, any subsequent transferee has record notice that the foreclosure is simply void.


4. A wholly void foreclosure deed passes no title even to a supposed "bona fide purchaser"


5. The Grantee of an invalid (wholly void) foreclosure deed does not have record title, nor does any person claiming under a wholly void deed, and the decision of the lower land court properly dismissed Bevilacqua's petition.


6. The land court correctly reasoned that the remedy available to Bevilacqua was not against the wrongly foreclosed homeowner but rather against the wrongly foreclosing bank and/or perhaps the servicer (depending on who actually conducted the foreclosure)


When thinking about the implications of Bevilacqua – the importance of point six cannot be overstated.
 IF YOU ARE BEING FORECLOSED ON - FIGHT IT!  CONTACT YOUR LEGAL AID OR AN ATTORNEY!  IF YOU HAVE BEEN FORECLOSED ON AT ANY TIME IN THE LAST FEW YEARS - CONTACT AN ATTORNEY START A SUIT - JOIN A CLASS ACTION SUIT!
THIS RULING MAKES IT POSSIBLE NOW!


CLASS ACTION ATTORNEYS...... START YOUR PAPERWORK - START GOING!  YOU NEED HELP GETTING PEOPLE?  CONTACT ME - I WILL HELP IN ALL WAYS POSSIBLE!


Added 10/25/11 - Excellent article from Seeking Alpha about this ruling - I highly suggest everyone reading it!

11 comments:

  1. The Bit hitters have Cleary Gottlieb batting for them (USD > 600 HR) and there was a conference a coupla weeks ago in London entitled Why the House Always Wins, litigating against banks.

    Most big law firms are to conflict-of-interest riddled to bother: they would rather sit on the banking panels (which, O surprise, have been vastly enlarged of late) and count easy cash for boilerplate by the kilo. But go for it: none of this would cut much ice in the right jurisdiction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Greetings Sherrie, I would like to talk to you, because they stole my home Feb. 2, 2009 and all of my belongs I mean everything, my wife filed for a divorce, and custody of my son, this has totally distroyed my life. Homeless and no family. thanks dave debrookhart@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  3. My Name is Chris Uhland... We had a MERS loan... Countrywide began Foreclosure on us... This in turn FORCED a Short Sale which we tried to work with the mortgage company and they would not... and we would not have sold our home which went from $270.000 in market value to $30,000... for $16,000 which the forced Short Sale Created... There is so much more to this... Fraudlent Mortgage Liars Loan, Mis representing documentation, MERS, MERS, MERS and so much more... Can't Find any one to help... If anyone can help... Please contact me, Chris Uhland at DigiPub001@aol.com .
    Thank You So Very Much... Most sadly, The Poster Child For Mortgage Fraud & Preditory Lending... Chris Uhland

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh, Sherrie! Do I dare hope? Do you think there is any chance our judge will see this? If I knew his email address I would send it. The assignment of Deed entered into evidence shows all sorts of nonsense, but it was an eviction hearing. Will it matter?
    This was one of our key arguments, that they had clouded title and no clear claim to be our landlord.
    Thanks for the article, but I had better get back to packing. Hope is great, but if he comes back and says "24 hours" I can't be out that fast, I have to be prepared for the worst.
    THANK YOU for your tireless efforts.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Riverside Court is truly conspiracy with PIC and Bank of America. I object to court and plaintiff four times to perjury. I did not want to disqualified the judge from the beginning, but to use constitutional laws, conspiracy against rights, and deprivation rights under color of law for defense. Because she has been ordered and planned to go against me without any recognizable factual evidences, but based upon hearsay, I have to disqualify her. Before she make a judgement to rule me a restrained order, I use California Constitution Article 20, Section 3 saying that "she has no oath of office", so must be disqualified. I ordered her to "step down" twice.... you will very enjoy the court transcript later. It is fun to fight with conspiracy groups.

    ReplyDelete
  6. http://www.facebook.com/kenjmeng
    http://www.facebook.com/sueBOA
    Save our Nation, Stop Foreclosures!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hello,
    if you're in this bind, I would sugest the following link and get yourself educated on this thorny suject. Anyone can do this, here you can find tools and support to defend yourselves against these predatory parasites.
    consumerdefenseprograms.com/dap/a/?a=1925
    good luck to all.
    Joe

    ReplyDelete
  8. If you want to be inspired....please click the following link: http://www.ashtarcommandcrew.net/profiles/blog/list?user=1zx7dpfzd0sr2

    Ascension stands before Humanity....we are "Returning Home".....Look to the skies dear souls....OUR FAMILY has "returned"....NESARA

    ReplyDelete
  9. I have an active case against WF that I filed in Federal Court in August of 2010. UDTPA claim survived summary judgement. I am LOOKING for verifiable usable testimony about how banks are doing this. In my case during a "work-out" program, they gave me payment instructions over the phone, but nothing in writing. They even went so far as to deny me written records of our phone calls and instructions and told me that the only way I could get a hold of them is to subpoena them in a lawsuit!
    Now they they got their wish, they claim not to have any such recordings. If you can help with submittable evidence that shows that this practice is common, or if I can help you in any way, contact me at home@naef.us

    ReplyDelete
  10. Hello Sherrie
    Thank you for helping people.
    I will need your help too.
    ilecaj at yahoo.com.

    thank you
    ilir

    ReplyDelete
  11. A Whistle Blower / Qui-Tam case was filed against the Massachusetts Land Court after it was discovered that allegations #2, 3 and 4 of the Complaint to Foreclose Mortgage was intentionally ommitted from the Complaints served on all the homeowners in Massachusetts. Thats right folks, see for yourself. The complaint that was served upon you did not contain the entire complaint. Notice that on face of the Complaint you received there is Allegation #1. Only #1 appears because the Complaint form supplied by the Land Court and used on all foreclosures has TWO SIDES!

    YES, A TWO SIDED COMPLAINT! BOTH SIDE A AND SIDE B OF YOUR COMPLAINT EXIST. YOU NEVER GOT THE B SIDE.

    Violation of Due Process Rights, Violation of Servicing Rules of the Court, Fraud, RICO. Etc, Etc.... The entire staff of the Land Court knew this was happening..

    The Whistle Blower case can be found at: Erickson-Bey v. Unnamed Defendants
    Docket #: 1:12-cv-11580-RGS. Case has been unsealed and is available for public review.


    The A side contains language about S&S Act of 1940. The B side contains three additional allegations - #2, 3 and 4. See for yourself, examine your complaint.

    All foreclosed cases removed from the Land Court to storage have been updated to include the entire Complaint to Foreclose Mortgage. The B side was unavailable to the public prior to the foreclosure sale. Allegations #2, 3 and 4 were contained within the ORIGINAL FILED Complaint to Foreclose the Mortgage (FILED WITH THE LAND COURT), THEN, inserted into the case file after the foreclosure sale on each and every case.. The property owner never received the B side of the complaint...

    See for yourself then email me @ t3erickson@hotmail.com

    ReplyDelete