Show Me the Note Meets the Lynchpin

Thu, May 15, 2014 - 9:52am

The facade is cracking on the once impenetrable fortress that is the Wall Street securitization scheme for home mortgages.

One blogger who posts tirelessly has penned must-read piece for anyone interested in this area.

My thoughts are straightforward. Many homeowners took on home loan debt to get a piece of the American dream. The problem for millions of them, though, was the simple fact that they could not afford a traditional 20% down, 30 year amortized loan. Along came Wall Street, and invented Securitization. This scheme fostered reckless lending to anyone who could fog a mirror, because the lender had no skin in the game, and the borrower operated under the illusion that the low teaser payments on the low docs or no docs loan would never end. Eventually, millions of loans fell into default, sparking a foreclosure wave.

The problem was that the securitization model separated the lender from the borrower. In the foreclosures that ensued, borrowers claimed the loans were void, due to all sorts of fraud and fakery permeating the securitization process. Borrowers asked courts to set aside the loans for many reasons, including predatory lending claims, and the now famous "show me the note" defense where borrowers claimed that the foreclosing lender had no right to foreclose because it never gained the legal posture to do so.

On the surface, Courts balked at giving homeowners a "free" home, even in cases where fraud and deception were rampant.

In Florida, a judicial foreclosure state, forged, fake documents were the norm, and our lexicon gained a new word, "robosigner." Still, Wall Street churned out the foreclosures while some cases made their way up the appellate court ladder.

Among those cases was one that the Ninth Circuit decided recently, linked below, which shows that the courts are revisiting this area and really are focusing on the corrupt securitization model.

Also linked below is the most comprehensive, easy to read piece putting it all together that I have ever seen. Please read the below blogger's short piece, then click on the link and read the Amicus Brief. I promise you will walk away more informed.

As to my predictions of where this may lead, all I can say is that truth appears to be emerging as to the systemic corruption that is Wall Street and the western fiat scheme in general, so one can hope.

He wrote this, which is so good, that I wanted to share it verbatim, from his site, here,

"It is interesting to watch the evolution of thought in the Courts. But it is also infuriating. They treat false claims of securitization as a novel issue; but in fact, there is nothing novel about Ponzi Schemes, and other types of fraud.

Yet the Court continue to ponder the issue, probably wondering how they could possibly explain their prior decisions, the millions of foreclosures that have already occurred, and the 15 million people who were ejected from homes and lifestyles, jobs, and even lives (murder-suicides).

This is not rocket science despite the layers upon layers of paper that Wall Street throws at the issue. The simple facts and law governing loans, and secured loans in particular, need only be applied as they were written and interpreted for centuries.

If I loan you money, you must pay it back. If I don’t loan you money then I have no reason to demand you pay it “back” because I never loaned you money in the first instance. If I purchase a real loan for real money, then you owe the money to me. If I don’t purchase the loan, then I have no right to your money.

If some other person gives the loan you were looking for then that is a matter between you and them — not you and me. Whether I race to the courthouse or not, I cannot collect, get a judgment or foreclose unless you fail to contest it. The only way I could ever obtain a judgment against you on a false claim is if you don’t answer it. That isn’t because it is right that I should have a judgment against you and for me, it is just because the rules work that way. But even after that you still have some options to set aside the judgment or action on the alleged debt that doesn’t really exist.

Possessing an assignment from a party who never owned the loan has never been considered as conferring some right on the assignee. And Faulty, notes, mortgages, indorsements and assignments have very clear laws and precedent. The defective ones are thrown out. Why? Because the object is to identify REAL transactions in which real value exchanged hands. And because the object is to ignore documentation that REFERS to a transaction that never took place.

It is one thing to have an executed note or some other testimony of proffered evidence of a loan, and another to show the Court the actual canceled check in which you advanced the money. One document talks about the transaction while the other IS the transaction. It is the difference between talking the talk and walking the walk. Talking about Paris doesn’t get you there.

You might have received a loan from someone at closing but the odds are that you didn’t get it from the Payee on the note, the mortgagee on the mortgage, the nominee, the beneficiary on the deed of trust or any of the other parties that were disclosed.

Finally the Courts are asking about the reality that Judge Shack in New York and Judge Boyco in Ohio were talking about 6 years ago, which was picked up by a number of Judges that were suddenly rotated out of the position to hear foreclosure cases. Politics frequently trumps the law, at least for a while. And politics is all about money. And if it is about money, then the banks are the obvious place to look.

I commend to your reading, the short Hooker Case (Link below) and the Amicus Brief (link below) submitted by laymen for your review and study. While not exactly what we would like to see both provide compelling evidence of a movement on the bench toward reality and away from the smoke and mirrors of the largest economic crime in human history.

The implications for both pleading and discovery are, I believe, self evident. HINT: I have it on good authority that the IRS form mentioned in the Amicus Brief is feared by Wall Street as the lynchpin of their position: once pulled the whole thing falls apart as it becomes obvious that the “trusts” neither received funds from the investors nor did they receive loans from the aggregators. That Amicus Brief also contains the only valid diagram of the actual practice of securitization in existence (other than the ones I have drawn in seminars). Notice how different it is from the diagrams of securitization that trace the wording of the securitization documents. it is the simple difference between truth (what happened) and fiction (what they say happened and why you shouldn’t be allowed to ask what really happened).

Hooker v Northwest Trustee Services 11-35534


For information on lawyers, litigation assistance (to lawyers), how to research applicable laws, litigation, modification, short-sale, Hardest Hit Funds, and other Federal, State and private programs call 520-405-1688 or 954-495-9867. Ask about AMGAR our latest program for assistance to homeowners."

About the Author


May 15, 2014 - 10:12am


Great post CL!

Could you please give me your opinion on a note that went through the infamous MERS?

EDIT: I see this one did go through MERS.

old tradesman
May 15, 2014 - 10:21am
May 15, 2014 - 10:23am

Thanks CL

We have an offer on a home in Fl that is a bank agreed short sale. They are currently finalizing the paperwork and we expect it to be accepted with closing late June.

Is there a way to ensure that we know the bank has ownership and the home was not part of this robo signing?

We will pay around 60% down. The title insurance, as I understand will protect the mortgae company, should we get title insurance for our down payment?



May 15, 2014 - 10:26am
Dagney Taggart
May 15, 2014 - 10:29am



Mr. Fix
May 15, 2014 - 10:35am

Thank you California Lawyer,

This is a subject that has always held my interest, it kind of sucks that you would pay off the house over 30 years, and never be able to get title to it. The fraud runs even deeper than that, even when you own your house out right, the town, and the state will still extort fees from you for the rest of your life for simply being there.

“Homeownership” was a dream that has become a nightmare for many.

And it's all on purpose.

There is no way out of this crime wave, but even a complete collapse, and a reset, would still leave the Evil Empire firmly in charge, and the rest of us with literally nothing.

This will come down to fighting for our rights.

May 15, 2014 - 10:52am


I bought a house for 265K in Oct 2006. It is currently at ~170K

I made my last payment in Dec '09 - BoA and I still haven't been to court, haven't had any hearings. The house is still in my name at the court house as shown on all the records.

Some of my experiences..

My loan was originally through TBW (Taylor Bean and Whitaker). One month I got a call from BoA (bank of amerika) demanding that I submit my monthly loan payment. That is how I learned that they had purchased TBW and all of their loans. I called TBW of course and they refused to refund the monthly payment that I had already made, stating that it had already been forwarded to BoA. Somehow I was forced to act as the go between for the two banks and after dozens of phone calls over the course of about two weeks BoA reluctantly admitted that they had indeed received payment..days before calling me for the first time.

I lost my job in Dec 2009. I was calling BoA in October telling them about my imminent layoff. They stated that there was nothing they could do to help me unless and until I missed three consecutive payments. Having had previous experiences with (one of) the great satans before I kept an entire log book dedicated to recording everything that happened. Everything they told me was written down; employee names and numbers, times and dates of calls, directions, forms sent and received, etc.

Missing the three payments allowed them to fast track me for foreclosure of course, but that was something I learned years later. I was a claimant in the 50 state BS garbage contrived let the banks off the hook lawsuit. Got my check for a whopping $500. Most curious to me was that it specifically stated that by accepting I was NOT barred from future legal action.

Meanwhile the house has been completely unattended for more than 4 years. It is probably in need of repairs at this point.

BoA and I had contact twice. They scheduled a hearing and didn't show up. I was at the courthouse rearing to go. It was already rescheduled when I got there, yet not a single person at the courthouse could tell me where or when.

The second time was when I arrived home from work and saw two degenerates walking around the house. I was a leo at the time and was coming home from work in full uniform. Of course those "agents of the bank" had no id, no papers, nothing to identify themselves except a phone number. Unfortunately I couldn't press the issue.

My last contact was an incredibly long phone call where I kept demanding to speak to the next manager - it culminated in them threatening to sue me for recording them (my residence allows anyone to be recorded provided one person gives consent, obviously i consented to recording myself so..) and them refusing to speak to me. They never have since then.

My loan clearly shows MERS as the recipient. Guess someday this issue will resolve itself.

Scooterold tradesman
May 15, 2014 - 11:35am

Thanks OT !

Thanks OT !

May 15, 2014 - 12:09pm

Fascinating read CaL. Thx

Fascinating read CaL. Thx

May 15, 2014 - 12:28pm

Splinter in my mind

Dear people,

Something thought is driving me crazy like there is splinter in my mind for a while.

Its a theory why the gold and silver price is “controlled / contained” to abnormal low levels. It also applies for mining shares. I have the following assumptions:

1) Quantitative easing, or the creation of money out of the blue, DEVALUES the currency which is created

2) This “fresh” created money can be used to buy all forms mining equipment to dig up gold and silver .

3) The gold and silver found by this equipment can be dumped onto the market, or give as a present to the Chinese. Why? Because of point 4)

4) When gold and silver are dumped onto the market, this usually has a negative price effect on the asset (gold / silver).

5) A declining gold and silver price, makes the “currency” more strong, which eliminates the effect of step 1

6) repeat step 1

Does steps 1 to 6 explain all what is happening to the gold and silver market and mining shares the recent dramatic years?

Please convince me the above is not true.

I will post the above question also onto the blog of Dan Norcini

Forgive me my bad English

Thanks in advance

Key Economic Events Week of 10/14

10/15 8:30 ET Empire State Fed MI
10/16 8:30 ET Retail Sales
10/16 10:00 ET Business Inventories
10/17 8:30 ET Housing Starts and Bldg Perms
10/17 8:30 ET Philly Fed MI
10/17 9:15 ET Cap Ute and Ind Prod
10/18 10:00 ET LEIII
10/18 Speeches from Goons Kaplan, George and Chlamydia

Subscribe or login to read all comments.


Donate Shop

Get Your Subscriber Benefits

Private iTunes feed for all TF Metals Report podcasts, and access to Vault member forum discussions!

Key Economic Events Week of 10/14

10/15 8:30 ET Empire State Fed MI
10/16 8:30 ET Retail Sales
10/16 10:00 ET Business Inventories
10/17 8:30 ET Housing Starts and Bldg Perms
10/17 8:30 ET Philly Fed MI
10/17 9:15 ET Cap Ute and Ind Prod
10/18 10:00 ET LEIII
10/18 Speeches from Goons Kaplan, George and Chlamydia

Key Economic Events Week of 10/7

10/8 8:30 ET Producer Price Index
10/9 10:00 ET Job Openings
10/9 10:00 ET Wholesale Inventories
10/9 2:00 ET September FOMC minutes
10/10 8:30 ET Consumer Price Index
10/11 10:00 ET Consumer Sentiment

Key Economic Events Week of 9/30

9/30 9:45 ET Chicago PMI
10/1 9:45 ET Markit Manu PMI
10/1 10:00 ET ISM Manu PMI
10/1 10:00 ET Construction Spending
10/2 China Golden Week Begins
10/2 8:15 ET ADP jobs report
10/3 9:45 ET Markit Service PMI
10/3 10:00 ET ISM Service PMI
10/3 10:00 ET Factory Orders
10/4 8:30 ET BLSBS
10/4 8:30 ET US Trade Deficit

Key Economic Events Week of 9/23

9/23 9:45 ET Markit flash PMIs
9/24 10:00 ET Consumer Confidence
9/26 8:30 ET Q2 GDP third guess
9/27 8:30 ET Durable Goods
9/27 8:30 ET Pers Inc and Cons Spend
9/27 8:30 ET Core Inflation

Key Economic Events Week of 9/16

9/17 9:15 ET Cap Ute & Ind Prod
9/18 8:30 ET Housing Starts & Bldg Perm.
9/18 2:00 ET Fedlines
9/18 2:30 ET CGP presser
9/19 8:30 ET Philly Fed
9/19 10:00 ET Existing Home Sales

Key Economic Events Week of 9/9

9/10 10:00 ET Job openings
9/11 8:30 ET PPI
9/11 10:00 ET Wholesale Inv.
9/12 8:30 ET CPI
9/13 8:30 ET Retail Sales
9/13 10:00 ET Consumer Sentiment
9/13 10:00 ET Business Inv.

Key Economic Events Week of 9/3

9/3 9:45 ET Markit Manu PMI
9/3 10:00 ET ISM Manu PMI
9/3 10:00 ET Construction Spending
9/4 8:30 ET Foreign Trade Deficit
9/5 9:45 ET Markit Svc PMI
9/5 10:00 ET ISM Svc PMI
9/5 10:00 ET Factory Orders
9/6 8:30 ET BLSBS

Key Economic Events Week of 8/26

8/26 8:30 ET Durable Goods
8/27 9:00 ET Case-Shiller Home Price Idx
8/27 10:00 ET Consumer Confidence
8/29 8:30 ET Q2 GDP 2nd guess
8/29 8:30 ET Advance Trade in Goods
8/30 8:30 ET Pers. Inc. and Cons. Spend.
8/30 8:30 ET Core Inflation
8/30 9:45 ET Chicago PMI

Key Economic Events Week of 8/19

8/21 10:00 ET Existing home sales
8/21 2:00 ET July FOMC minutes
8/22 9:45 ET Markit Manu and Svc PMIs
8/22 Jackson Holedown begins
8/23 10:00 ET Chief Goon Powell speaks

Key Economic Events Week of 8/12

8/13 8:30 ET Consumer Price Index
8/14 8:30 ET Retail Sales
8/14 8:30 ET Productivity & Labor Costs
8/14 8:30 ET Philly Fed
8/14 9:15 ET Ind Prod and Cap Ute
8/14 10:00 ET Business Inventories
8/15 8:30 ET Housing Starts & Bldg Permits

Recent Comments

Forum Discussion

by Green Lantern, Oct 16, 2019 - 9:53pm
by zman, Oct 16, 2019 - 8:51pm
by NW VIEW, Oct 16, 2019 - 7:31pm
by ancientmoney, Oct 16, 2019 - 5:23pm