TRY ME!
Foreclosure Fraudulent Judgment Challenge
Summary
To challenge a foreclosure judgment due to fraud and jurisdiction issues, file a motion under Rule 60(b)(4) and (6) in the original court. Include a detailed affidavit with evidence of fraud and jurisdictional issues. Serve the motion to all parties involved and prepare for a court hearing. Consider legal representation for complex arguments. Monitor the courts response and be ready for potential appeals.Full Conversation
AI; in the original foreclosure case in the housing court, summary judgment was granted to the claimant based on fraudulent information submit it to the court. During the physical eviction a warehouser, without a license to remove property and without an illegal facility to store property was utilized to remove my possessions. The warehouser was brought into the original case but later the judge established a second case for the warehouser and the bank but later release the bank who had hired the warehouser. I am now filing claims against the bank, 60B4 and 60B6, for fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction. Please outline a procedure to deal with this situation
Hey ****, you're dealing with a complex situation. Here’s a general outline for your claims under Rule *(b)(*) and (*):
*. Drafting the Motion:
- Clearly state the relief you are seeking under Rule *(b)(*) and *(b)(*).
- Include all relevant facts, evidence of fraud, and jurisdictional issues.
*. Supporting Affidavit:
- Attach an affidavit detailing the fraudulent actions and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include any evidence supporting your claims.
*. Filing the Motion:
- File the motion in the same court that issued the original judgment.
- Ensure to include all necessary documents and exhibits.
*. Serving the Motion:
- Serve copies of the motion to all parties involved, including the bank and warehouser.
*. Court Hearing:
- Be prepared to present your case and evidence at the hearing.
- Consider seeking legal representation for complex arguments.
*. Follow-Up:
- Monitor the court’s response and be prepared for potential appeals.
Would you like to be connected to a local lawyer who can better assist you with your case?
*. Drafting the Motion:
- Clearly state the relief you are seeking under Rule *(b)(*) and *(b)(*).
- Include all relevant facts, evidence of fraud, and jurisdictional issues.
*. Supporting Affidavit:
- Attach an affidavit detailing the fraudulent actions and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include any evidence supporting your claims.
*. Filing the Motion:
- File the motion in the same court that issued the original judgment.
- Ensure to include all necessary documents and exhibits.
*. Serving the Motion:
- Serve copies of the motion to all parties involved, including the bank and warehouser.
*. Court Hearing:
- Be prepared to present your case and evidence at the hearing.
- Consider seeking legal representation for complex arguments.
*. Follow-Up:
- Monitor the court’s response and be prepared for potential appeals.
Would you like to be connected to a local lawyer who can better assist you with your case?
They claimed that the first case is now closed. Do I now ask them to reopen it?
It sounds like you need to reopen the original case based on new evidence of fraud and lack of jurisdiction. You should file a motion to reopen the case under Rule *(b) in the same court where the original judgment was issued. Would you like to connect with a local lawyer to assist you with this process?
Please outline how to reopen the case along with introducing MY 60B four and six claims Of fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction
Case Rating: *
Here’s a general outline for reopening the case under Rule *(b)(*) and (*):
*. Draft the Motion:
- Clearly state you are seeking relief under Rule *(b)(*) and *(b)(*) due to fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include relevant facts, evidence of fraud, and jurisdictional issues.
*. Supporting Affidavit:
- Attach an affidavit detailing the fraudulent actions and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include evidence supporting your claims.
*. Filing the Motion:
- File the motion in the same court that issued the original judgment.
- Ensure to include all necessary documents and exhibits.
*. Serving the Motion:
- Serve copies of the motion to all parties involved, including the bank and warehouser.
*. Court Hearing:
- Be prepared to present your case and evidence at the hearing.
- Consider seeking legal representation for complex arguments.
*. Follow-Up:
- Monitor the court’s response and be prepared for potential appeals.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Here’s a general outline for reopening the case under Rule *(b)(*) and (*):
*. Draft the Motion:
- Clearly state you are seeking relief under Rule *(b)(*) and *(b)(*) due to fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include relevant facts, evidence of fraud, and jurisdictional issues.
*. Supporting Affidavit:
- Attach an affidavit detailing the fraudulent actions and lack of jurisdiction.
- Include evidence supporting your claims.
*. Filing the Motion:
- File the motion in the same court that issued the original judgment.
- Ensure to include all necessary documents and exhibits.
*. Serving the Motion:
- Serve copies of the motion to all parties involved, including the bank and warehouser.
*. Court Hearing:
- Be prepared to present your case and evidence at the hearing.
- Consider seeking legal representation for complex arguments.
*. Follow-Up:
- Monitor the court’s response and be prepared for potential appeals.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Please write the introduction
Case Rating: *
Hey ****,
You’re handling a pretty complex legal situation involving foreclosure, fraudulent claims, and multiple court cases. Here’s an introduction to help you get started with your claims under Rule *(b)(*) and (*):
---
Hey ****,
You’re handling a pretty complex legal situation involving foreclosure, fraudulent claims, and multiple court cases. Here’s an introduction to help you get started with your claims under Rule *(b)(*) and (*):
---
Introduction
I am filing a motion under Rule *(b)(*) and (*) to seek relief from the judgment based on fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction. The original judgment was granted due to the submission of fraudulent information by the claimant. Additionally, unauthorized warehousing activities further complicate the case. This motion aims to reopen the case and address these serious legal violations.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
I am filing a motion under Rule *(b)(*) and (*) to seek relief from the judgment based on fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction. The original judgment was granted due to the submission of fraudulent information by the claimant. Additionally, unauthorized warehousing activities further complicate the case. This motion aims to reopen the case and address these serious legal violations.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
AI, I am filing a brief to the District Court appealing decisions that were made in the bankruptcy court. The claimant did not file a proof of claim. They were not entitled to any relief without filing it. The bankruptcy court erred by Not determining if there was a legitimate claim, (Article * standing), regardless of what decision was made in the lower court; Sending a title * case back to the lower courts instead of to the District Court; they did not establish that the claimant was even a creditor; they ignored the 60B4 and 60B6 claims of fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction; they did not provide it written response based on findings of facts pursuant to rule *, as requested. Please Provide an opening for this brief.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's an opening for your brief:
---
Opening Statement
I am appealing the decisions made by the bankruptcy court in the case of [Case Number]. The claimant failed to file a proof of claim, which is a prerequisite for any relief. The bankruptcy court erred by not determining the legitimacy of the claim, disregarding the requirements of Article * standing. Additionally, the court incorrectly sent the Title * case back to the lower courts instead of the District Court and failed to establish the claimant as a creditor. The court also ignored my Rule *(b)(*) and (*) claims of fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction. Furthermore, the bankruptcy court did not provide a written response based on findings of fact pursuant to Rule *, as requested.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Hey ****, here's an opening for your brief:
---
Opening Statement
I am appealing the decisions made by the bankruptcy court in the case of [Case Number]. The claimant failed to file a proof of claim, which is a prerequisite for any relief. The bankruptcy court erred by not determining the legitimacy of the claim, disregarding the requirements of Article * standing. Additionally, the court incorrectly sent the Title * case back to the lower courts instead of the District Court and failed to establish the claimant as a creditor. The court also ignored my Rule *(b)(*) and (*) claims of fraud on the court and lack of jurisdiction. Furthermore, the bankruptcy court did not provide a written response based on findings of fact pursuant to Rule *, as requested.
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
AI; Instead of just saying sent the Title * case back to the lower courts, should I insert the name of the court, Western Housing Court, which does not have the authority to determine title?
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, you should definitely specify the name of the court to clarify your argument. Here's the revised sentence:
"Additionally, the court incorrectly sent the Title * case back to the Western Housing Court, which does not have the authority to determine title."
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, you should definitely specify the name of the court to clarify your argument. Here's the revised sentence:
"Additionally, the court incorrectly sent the Title * case back to the Western Housing Court, which does not have the authority to determine title."
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Plenty and I will be back
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, I'm glad to help you with your legal issues. Is there any specific part of your brief or motion that you need further assistance with?
Hey ****, I'm glad to help you with your legal issues. Is there any specific part of your brief or motion that you need further assistance with?
Should I followed My firstl paragraph with: Statements of Issues Presented to be Reviewed - Did the court err by proceeding despite the bankruptcy court's lack of jurisdiction?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant, a debt collector claiming to be a creditor, to proceed without filing a proof of claim?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant to take a position in a legal proceeding that was contrary to a position they previously maintained if it would harm the other party who relied on the original position?
Should I say judge erred or erred?
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, you can follow your first paragraph with "Statements of Issues Presented to be Reviewed." This will help clearly outline the key questions for the court to consider.
Regarding your second question, you can simply say "Did the court err" as this is a more neutral way to phrase the issue.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, you can follow your first paragraph with "Statements of Issues Presented to be Reviewed." This will help clearly outline the key questions for the court to consider.
Regarding your second question, you can simply say "Did the court err" as this is a more neutral way to phrase the issue.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Plenty
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, your case is intricate and involves multiple legal proceedings. Here’s a bit more guidance:
*. Use "Did the court err" as it maintains neutrality.
*. Follow your first paragraph with "Statements of Issues Presented to be Reviewed."
Would you like additional assistance with any other part of your brief?
Hey ****, your case is intricate and involves multiple legal proceedings. Here’s a bit more guidance:
*. Use "Did the court err" as it maintains neutrality.
*. Follow your first paragraph with "Statements of Issues Presented to be Reviewed."
Would you like additional assistance with any other part of your brief?
please enhance; - Did the court err by proceeding despite the bankruptcy court's lack of jurisdiction?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant, a debt collector claiming to be a creditor, to proceed without filing a proof of claim?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant to take a position in a legal proceeding that was contrary to a position they previously maintained if it would harm the other party who relied on the original position? - Did the court err by violating my constitutional rights by remanding the adversarial case back to the lower courts instead of the District Court?
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by proceeding despite the bankruptcy court's lack of jurisdiction?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant, a debt collector claiming to be a creditor, to proceed without filing a proof of claim?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant to take a position in a legal proceeding contrary to a position they previously maintained, which harmed the other party who relied on the original position?
- Did the court err by violating my constitutional rights by remanding the adversarial case to the lower courts instead of the District Court?
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by proceeding despite the bankruptcy court's lack of jurisdiction?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant, a debt collector claiming to be a creditor, to proceed without filing a proof of claim?
- Did the court err by allowing the claimant to take a position in a legal proceeding contrary to a position they previously maintained, which harmed the other party who relied on the original position?
- Did the court err by violating my constitutional rights by remanding the adversarial case to the lower courts instead of the District Court?
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
Please enhance; - Did the court err by overlooking bankruptcy rules, specifically the lack of the required Northern California Bankruptcy Court’s approval for transactions while in bankruptcy, including an invalid transfer of property, which further questions the claims of validity?
-Did the court err by permitting the claimant to evade responding to the assertions by invoking the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which is inapplicable when addressing evidence of fraud upon the court?
- Did the court err by failing to require the claimant to establish Article III standing?
- Did the court err by not verifying the assignment of the debt?
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by overlooking bankruptcy rules, specifically the lack of the required Northern California Bankruptcy Court’s approval for transactions while in bankruptcy, including an invalid transfer of property, which further questions the claims of validity?
- Did the court err by permitting the claimant to evade responding to the assertions by invoking the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which is inapplicable when addressing evidence of fraud upon the court?
- Did the court err by failing to require the claimant to establish Article III standing?
- Did the court err by not verifying the assignment of the debt?
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by overlooking bankruptcy rules, specifically the lack of the required Northern California Bankruptcy Court’s approval for transactions while in bankruptcy, including an invalid transfer of property, which further questions the claims of validity?
- Did the court err by permitting the claimant to evade responding to the assertions by invoking the Rooker-Feldman doctrine, which is inapplicable when addressing evidence of fraud upon the court?
- Did the court err by failing to require the claimant to establish Article III standing?
- Did the court err by not verifying the assignment of the debt?
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Please enhance; - Did the court err by not requiring the claimant to provide an endorsement of the promissory note?
- Did the court err by not confirming the chain of title for the note?
- Did the court err by not addressing the issue of non-conforming loans and escalating payments?
- Did the court err by ignoring that the debt in question is time-barred?
- Did the court err by not demanding evidence of a negotiated purchase of the note or proof of a claim of injury?
- Did the court err by overlooking evidence of fraud upon the court, including altered documents and misrepresentations?
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity:
- Did the court err by not requiring the claimant to provide an endorsement of the promissory note?
- Did the court err by not confirming the chain of title for the note?
- Did the court err by not addressing the issue of non-conforming loans and escalating payments?
- Did the court err by ignoring that the debt in question is time-barred?
- Did the court err by not demanding evidence of a negotiated purchase of the note or proof of a claim of injury?
- Did the court err by overlooking evidence of fraud upon the court, including altered documents and misrepresentations?
Would you like any additional assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity:
- Did the court err by not requiring the claimant to provide an endorsement of the promissory note?
- Did the court err by not confirming the chain of title for the note?
- Did the court err by not addressing the issue of non-conforming loans and escalating payments?
- Did the court err by ignoring that the debt in question is time-barred?
- Did the court err by not demanding evidence of a negotiated purchase of the note or proof of a claim of injury?
- Did the court err by overlooking evidence of fraud upon the court, including altered documents and misrepresentations?
Would you like any additional assistance with your brief?
please enhance; - Did the court err by not providing the requested written explanation of the court’s decision based on findings of fact pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *?
- Did the court err in allowing ongoing discrimination and exploitation of civil and constitutional rights in a federal Bankruptcy court, particularly concerning an *-year-old senior citizen, emphasizing potential unfair and predatory practices?"
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by not providing the requested written explanation of its decision based on findings of fact pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *?
- Did the court err in allowing ongoing discrimination and exploitation of civil and constitutional rights in a federal Bankruptcy court, particularly concerning an *-year-old senior citizen, emphasizing potential unfair and predatory practices?
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, I've enhanced your statements for clarity and impact:
- Did the court err by not providing the requested written explanation of its decision based on findings of fact pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule *?
- Did the court err in allowing ongoing discrimination and exploitation of civil and constitutional rights in a federal Bankruptcy court, particularly concerning an *-year-old senior citizen, emphasizing potential unfair and predatory practices?
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
please enhance; These ongoing actions involving multiple federal statutes and conspiracy elements, including conspiracy to potentially offset any statute of limitations, fall under the following federal statutes:
- * U.S.C. §§ * & *: Civil Rights Conspiracy
- * U.S.C. § *: Federal Trade Commission Act (unfair or deceptive acts)
- * U.S.C. § *: Fair Debt Collections Practice act. - * U.S.C. § * et seq.: Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)
- * U.S.C. § *: Mail fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Wire fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Conspiracy to commit offense or defraud the United States
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
These ongoing actions, involving multiple federal statutes and conspiracy elements, including efforts to potentially offset any statute of limitations, fall under the following federal statutes:
- * U.S.C. §§ * & *: Civil Rights Conspiracy
- * U.S.C. § *: Federal Trade Commission Act (unfair or deceptive acts)
- * U.S.C. § *: Fair Debt Collections Practices Act
- * U.S.C. § * et seq.: Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)
- * U.S.C. § *: Mail fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Wire fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Conspiracy to commit offense or defraud the United States
---
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
These ongoing actions, involving multiple federal statutes and conspiracy elements, including efforts to potentially offset any statute of limitations, fall under the following federal statutes:
- * U.S.C. §§ * & *: Civil Rights Conspiracy
- * U.S.C. § *: Federal Trade Commission Act (unfair or deceptive acts)
- * U.S.C. § *: Fair Debt Collections Practices Act
- * U.S.C. § * et seq.: Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA)
- * U.S.C. § *: Mail fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Wire fraud
- * U.S.C. § *: Conspiracy to commit offense or defraud the United States
---
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
please enhance; These factors alone evidence the lack of subject matter jurisdiction and fraud upon the court. Under the common law principle, as stated in the Restatement of Contracts §§ * and *, contracts involving illegal activities are generally unenforceable. Massachusetts Law: Similar to federal law, Massachusetts follows the principle that contracts founded on illegal acts are void. Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter *, § *.
Case Rating: *
Here’s the enhanced statement:
---
These factors alone evidence the lack of subject matter jurisdiction and fraud upon the court. Under the common law principle, as stated in the Restatement of Contracts §§ * and *, contracts involving illegal activities are generally unenforceable.
Massachusetts Law:
- Similar to federal law, Massachusetts follows the principle that contracts founded on illegal acts are void.
- Refer to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter *, § *.
---
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Here’s the enhanced statement:
---
These factors alone evidence the lack of subject matter jurisdiction and fraud upon the court. Under the common law principle, as stated in the Restatement of Contracts §§ * and *, contracts involving illegal activities are generally unenforceable.
Massachusetts Law:
- Similar to federal law, Massachusetts follows the principle that contracts founded on illegal acts are void.
- Refer to Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter *, § *.
---
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Please enhance the following that I would like to add to my opening statement: King also moves the court to enter a discharge under * U.S.C. § * as BNYMT has never presented any authenticated evidence of having obtained a negotiated instrument indicating endorsement of the promissory note.
Case Rating: *
Sure, here's an enhanced version:
---
King also moves the court to enter a discharge under * U.S.C. § *, as BNYMT has never presented any authenticated evidence of having obtained a negotiated instrument indicating endorsement of the promissory note. The lack of such evidence questions the legitimacy of their claim and supports the argument for discharge.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
Sure, here's an enhanced version:
---
King also moves the court to enter a discharge under * U.S.C. § *, as BNYMT has never presented any authenticated evidence of having obtained a negotiated instrument indicating endorsement of the promissory note. The lack of such evidence questions the legitimacy of their claim and supports the argument for discharge.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
Having completed my “statement of issues to be presented” can this be followed by, Background: Blatant Omission of Material Fact in which BNYMT omitted the New York Supreme Court settlement agreement in which they argued against Bank of America and countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts. They're receiving $*.* billion for the violations, they argued the opposite in King's court case claiming that the loan did not have deficiencies was not in default and therefore was enforceable.??
Case Rating: *
Yes, you can follow your "statement of issues to be presented" with a background section. Here's a suggested way to frame it:
Yes, you can follow your "statement of issues to be presented" with a background section. Here's a suggested way to frame it:
Background:
BNYMT omitted a crucial material fact: the New York Supreme Court settlement agreement where they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts. They are receiving $*.* billion for these violations. In King’s case, they argued the opposite, claiming the loan had no deficiencies, was not in default, and was therefore enforceable.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
BNYMT omitted a crucial material fact: the New York Supreme Court settlement agreement where they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts. They are receiving $*.* billion for these violations. In King’s case, they argued the opposite, claiming the loan had no deficiencies, was not in default, and was therefore enforceable.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
In the background, do I expand on this crucial fact and provide specific details that tie in Dates and the parties involved? - On August *, *, in a settlement agreement (EX-*.* * dex992.htm), the Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee, omitted New York Supreme Court Settlement Agreement lawsuit in which they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts, including King’s CWALT *-J7, which were negatively affected and originally implemented by Community Lending Inc. (CLI) - On January *, *, BNY Mellon initiated a lawsuit asserting that the same CLI loans, initially claimed to be in default, were no longer in default after receiving an $*.* billion reimbursement for the compromised loans.
Case Rating: *
****, this seems to be a potentially strong case involving complex legal issues and significant financial matters. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
****, this seems to be a potentially strong case involving complex legal issues and significant financial matters. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
I filled out information before but never heard from anyone. Please enhance what I just sent.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's the enhanced background for your brief:
---
Background: Blatant Omission of Material Fact
BNYMT omitted a crucial material fact: the New York Supreme Court settlement agreement where they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts. They are receiving $*.* billion for these violations. In King’s case, they argued the opposite, claiming the loan had no deficiencies, was not in default, and was therefore enforceable.
- August *, *: In a settlement agreement (EX-*.* * dex992.htm), the Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee, omitted the New York Supreme Court Settlement Agreement lawsuit in which they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts, including King’s CWALT *-J7, which were negatively affected and originally implemented by Community Lending Inc. (CLI).
- January *, *: BNY Mellon initiated a lawsuit asserting that the same CLI loans, initially claimed to be in default, were no longer in default after receiving an $*.* billion reimbursement for the compromised loans.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's the enhanced background for your brief:
---
Background: Blatant Omission of Material Fact
BNYMT omitted a crucial material fact: the New York Supreme Court settlement agreement where they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts. They are receiving $*.* billion for these violations. In King’s case, they argued the opposite, claiming the loan had no deficiencies, was not in default, and was therefore enforceable.
- August *, *: In a settlement agreement (EX-*.* * dex992.htm), the Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee, omitted the New York Supreme Court Settlement Agreement lawsuit in which they argued against Bank of America and Countrywide for predatory origination practices involving * securitized trusts, including King’s CWALT *-J7, which were negatively affected and originally implemented by Community Lending Inc. (CLI).
- January *, *: BNY Mellon initiated a lawsuit asserting that the same CLI loans, initially claimed to be in default, were no longer in default after receiving an $*.* billion reimbursement for the compromised loans.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
When addressing areas of concern within the background, should I start with the original deficiencies of the loan or emphasize the characteristics of judicial estoppel; both claims our areas which could be addressed by the bankruptcy trustee,
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, it's essential to provide a clear and organized background. You might consider starting with the original deficiencies of the loan as it sets the context and basis for the claims. After that, you can emphasize the characteristics of judicial estoppel. This approach ensures that your narrative follows a logical progression from the initial issues to the legal doctrines that support your case.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Hey ****, it's essential to provide a clear and organized background. You might consider starting with the original deficiencies of the loan as it sets the context and basis for the claims. After that, you can emphasize the characteristics of judicial estoppel. This approach ensures that your narrative follows a logical progression from the initial issues to the legal doctrines that support your case.
Would you like any further assistance with your brief?
Background: Constitutional Discrepancy Violations of the CLI Refinance Original Loan
On August *, *, ComUnity Lending Inc., continuing within the same CWALT *-J7, implemented a bifurcated pair of loans, recorded in the Hampden County Registry of Deeds. - The first loan was for $*,* and the second for $*,*,*. This total package of $*,*,* greatly exceeded the legal lending limit based on the town of Longmeadow's appraisal of $*,*,* and any other appraisal within * miles. - Additionally, the loan amounts exceeded the Kings' qualification. - The teaser rate of $*,*, which escalated to $*,*, further violated lending laws, making the loans "doomed to fail."
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, it seems like your case involves significant legal issues and potential violations. Here's the enhanced background:
---
Background: Constitutional Discrepancy Violations of the CLI Refinance Original Loan
- August *, *: ComUnity Lending Inc., under CWALT *-J7, issued bifurcated loans recorded in the Hampden County Registry of Deeds:
- First loan: $*,*
- Second loan: $*,*,*
- Total Package: $*,*,*, exceeding the town of Longmeadow's appraisal of $*,*,* and nearby appraisals.
- Loan Qualification: The loan amounts exceeded the Kings' qualifications.
- Teaser Rate: Initial rate of $*,* escalated to $*,*, violating lending laws and setting the loans up for failure.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, it seems like your case involves significant legal issues and potential violations. Here's the enhanced background:
---
Background: Constitutional Discrepancy Violations of the CLI Refinance Original Loan
- August *, *: ComUnity Lending Inc., under CWALT *-J7, issued bifurcated loans recorded in the Hampden County Registry of Deeds:
- First loan: $*,*
- Second loan: $*,*,*
- Total Package: $*,*,*, exceeding the town of Longmeadow's appraisal of $*,*,* and nearby appraisals.
- Loan Qualification: The loan amounts exceeded the Kings' qualifications.
- Teaser Rate: Initial rate of $*,* escalated to $*,*, violating lending laws and setting the loans up for failure.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
-The courts have refused to address the fact that a loan generating almost *% negative amortization and not disclosed to a *-year-old debtor from day one might be considered predatory. - This oversight is significant in the context of the broader issues at hand. - The original refinance loan was non-conforming and bifurcated to conceal it being * % above the legal lending limit.
- These actions were prohibited by the Dodd-Frank Act as they contravened public policy.
- These actions constitute significant violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
Case Rating: *
****, it looks like you have a high-value case with significant legal issues and potential violations. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
****, it looks like you have a high-value case with significant legal issues and potential violations. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
I filled out that information but did not get a response. Please enhance the Previous thread
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
The courts have refused to address the fact that a loan generating almost *% negative amortization, not disclosed to a *-year-old debtor from day one, might be considered predatory. This oversight is significant in the context of the broader issues at hand.
- Original Refinance Loan: Non-conforming and bifurcated to conceal it being *% above the legal lending limit.
- Dodd-Frank Act: These actions were prohibited as they contravened public policy.
- Violations: These actions constitute significant violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
The courts have refused to address the fact that a loan generating almost *% negative amortization, not disclosed to a *-year-old debtor from day one, might be considered predatory. This oversight is significant in the context of the broader issues at hand.
- Original Refinance Loan: Non-conforming and bifurcated to conceal it being *% above the legal lending limit.
- Dodd-Frank Act: These actions were prohibited as they contravened public policy.
- Violations: These actions constitute significant violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - All contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void. - Further supporting the appearance of illegitimate origination, CLI, the original refinance lender, filed for liquidating bankruptcy, having claimed * DBAs, starting January *, *, and terminating on November *, *. - There is not any record from the Northern California Bankruptcy Court records, that has been presented, authorizing a sale, transfer, or assignment of the mortgage obligation, contrary to the purported assignment on December *, *.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
- All contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void.
- Further supporting the appearance of illegitimate origination, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), the original refinance lender, filed for liquidating bankruptcy, having claimed * DBAs, starting January *, *, and terminating on November *, *.
- There is no record from the Northern California Bankruptcy Court authorizing a sale, transfer, or assignment of the mortgage obligation, contrary to the purported assignment on December *, *.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
- All contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void.
- Further supporting the appearance of illegitimate origination, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), the original refinance lender, filed for liquidating bankruptcy, having claimed * DBAs, starting January *, *, and terminating on November *, *.
- There is no record from the Northern California Bankruptcy Court authorizing a sale, transfer, or assignment of the mortgage obligation, contrary to the purported assignment on December *, *.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Can you enhance with a possible law or Statue “all contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void”
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's the enhanced statement including a possible law/statute:
---
- All contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void. Under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § *, a contract is unenforceable if it involves illegal activities.
- Further supporting the appearance of illegitimate origination, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), the original refinance lender, filed for liquidating bankruptcy, having claimed * DBAs, starting January *, *, and terminating on November *, *.
- There is no record from the Northern California Bankruptcy Court authorizing a sale, transfer, or assignment of the mortgage obligation, contrary to the purported assignment on December *, *.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
Hey ****, here's the enhanced statement including a possible law/statute:
---
- All contracts stemming from an illegitimate origination are void. Under the Restatement (Second) of Contracts § *, a contract is unenforceable if it involves illegal activities.
- Further supporting the appearance of illegitimate origination, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), the original refinance lender, filed for liquidating bankruptcy, having claimed * DBAs, starting January *, *, and terminating on November *, *.
- There is no record from the Northern California Bankruptcy Court authorizing a sale, transfer, or assignment of the mortgage obligation, contrary to the purported assignment on December *, *.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
Please enhance; - In addition, there have not been any records presented showing any payments on the mortgage since January *, *. - According to UCC *-*, an assignment that is not authenticated cannot be considered valid evidence without direct testimony from the signatory. Consequently, payments should be made to the original lender due to the lack of authentication of the transfer. Any payments made otherwise would not fulfill the obligation under the note. - Pursuant to regulation F of the FDCPA and under Massachusetts Statutes Law the note became time-barred as of January *, *, six years after filing liquidating bankruptcy.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
- In addition, there have not been any records presented showing any payments on the mortgage since January *, *.
- According to UCC *-*, an assignment that is not authenticated cannot be considered valid evidence without direct testimony from the signatory. Consequently, payments should be made to the original lender due to the lack of authentication of the transfer. Any payments made otherwise would not fulfill the obligation under the note.
- Pursuant to Regulation F of the FDCPA and under Massachusetts Statutes, the note became time-barred as of January *, *, six years after filing for liquidating bankruptcy.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
- In addition, there have not been any records presented showing any payments on the mortgage since January *, *.
- According to UCC *-*, an assignment that is not authenticated cannot be considered valid evidence without direct testimony from the signatory. Consequently, payments should be made to the original lender due to the lack of authentication of the transfer. Any payments made otherwise would not fulfill the obligation under the note.
- Pursuant to Regulation F of the FDCPA and under Massachusetts Statutes, the note became time-barred as of January *, *, six years after filing for liquidating bankruptcy.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; Background: Constitutional Violation of Invalid Modification
On December *, *, an invalid modification purported to amend the original mortgages, even though it omitted the second bifurcated loan and the modification was not executed by the three original parties. -This information submitted by attorney Fumarola in the summary judgment of the WHC and was a part of his motion for relief of stay submitted to the bankruptcy court. - Bank of America home loans (BAC) injected themselves into the modification despite not having any recorded interest in the mortgage or promissory note.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your background statement:
---
Background: Constitutional Violation of Invalid Modification
- On December *, *, an invalid modification purported to amend the original mortgages, omitting the second bifurcated loan and not executed by the three original parties.
- This information was submitted by attorney Fumarola in the summary judgment of the WHC and was part of his motion for relief of stay submitted to the bankruptcy court.
- Bank of America Home Loans (BAC) injected themselves into the modification despite not having any recorded interest in the mortgage or promissory note.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your background statement:
---
Background: Constitutional Violation of Invalid Modification
- On December *, *, an invalid modification purported to amend the original mortgages, omitting the second bifurcated loan and not executed by the three original parties.
- This information was submitted by attorney Fumarola in the summary judgment of the WHC and was part of his motion for relief of stay submitted to the bankruptcy court.
- Bank of America Home Loans (BAC) injected themselves into the modification despite not having any recorded interest in the mortgage or promissory note.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Enhance please; - Mortgagor **** King Jr. and the original refinance lender, CLI, were not parties to the BAC Loan Modification Agreement, despite being two of the three original signers of the mortgaged property. - Only Terri A. Mayes-King signed the invalid modification on December *, *, while BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP, signed on March *, *. - The invalid modification mortgage payments ceased on the original note, triggering a second time-barred status six years later on December *, *, again making the note un-enforceable.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Mortgagor **** King Jr. and the original refinance lender, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), were not parties to the BAC Loan Modification Agreement, despite being two of the three original signers of the mortgaged property.
- Only Terri A. Mayes-King signed the invalid modification on December *, *, while BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP, signed on March *, *.
- The invalid modification mortgage payments ceased on the original note, triggering a second time-barred status six years later on December *, *, again making the note unenforceable.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Mortgagor **** King Jr. and the original refinance lender, ComUnity Lending Inc. (CLI), were not parties to the BAC Loan Modification Agreement, despite being two of the three original signers of the mortgaged property.
- Only Terri A. Mayes-King signed the invalid modification on December *, *, while BAC Home Loan Servicing, LP, signed on March *, *.
- The invalid modification mortgage payments ceased on the original note, triggering a second time-barred status six years later on December *, *, again making the note unenforceable.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Enhance please; - These continuing conspiracy actions are also potential violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practice Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- These continuing conspiracy actions are also potential violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- These continuing conspiracy actions are also potential violations of King’s Constitutional Rights, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Truth in Lending Act.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer a few questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
- Engaging in double-dipping, they acquired charged-off, time-barred, and distressed debt, then falsely represented these as secured claims in court to deceitfully foreclose on properties.
- This conduct exemplifies a clear case of judicial estoppel. Judicial estoppel prevents a party from assuming a position in a legal proceeding that contradicts one they successfully asserted in a previous proceeding. - This enabled BNYMT to enhance a prohibited foreclosure scheme, directly contradict their prior stance and undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
- In previous motions, I have highlighted BNY Mellon's contradictory claims and actions, which are central to the doctrine of judicial estoppel.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, it looks like your case involves significant legal issues and potential violations. Here’s the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Engaging in double-dipping, they acquired charged-off, time-barred, and distressed debt, then falsely represented these as secured claims in court to deceitfully foreclose on properties.
- This conduct exemplifies a clear case of judicial estoppel. Judicial estoppel prevents a party from assuming a position in a legal proceeding that contradicts one they successfully asserted in a previous proceeding.
- This enabled BNYMT to enhance a prohibited foreclosure scheme, directly contradict their prior stance and undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
- In previous motions, I have highlighted BNY Mellon's contradictory claims and actions, which are central to the doctrine of judicial estoppel.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, it looks like your case involves significant legal issues and potential violations. Here’s the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Engaging in double-dipping, they acquired charged-off, time-barred, and distressed debt, then falsely represented these as secured claims in court to deceitfully foreclose on properties.
- This conduct exemplifies a clear case of judicial estoppel. Judicial estoppel prevents a party from assuming a position in a legal proceeding that contradicts one they successfully asserted in a previous proceeding.
- This enabled BNYMT to enhance a prohibited foreclosure scheme, directly contradict their prior stance and undermine the integrity of the judicial process.
- In previous motions, I have highlighted BNY Mellon's contradictory claims and actions, which are central to the doctrine of judicial estoppel.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - Emphasizing these points is crucial for the following reasons:
- Inconsistent Positions: BNYMT has taken conflicting positions regarding the status of the loans, initially claiming origination deficiencies to justify receiving reimbursement and later asserting the loans did not have deficiencies, after receiving reimbursement, to initiate foreclosure proceedings.
- Impact on Judicial Integrity: Allowing BNY Mellon to benefit from these contradictory positions without accountability would erode the integrity of the judicial system and undermine public confidence in the fairness of legal proceedings.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here’s the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Emphasizing these points is crucial for the following reasons:
- Inconsistent Positions: BNYMT has taken conflicting positions regarding the status of the loans. Initially, they claimed origination deficiencies to justify receiving reimbursement but later asserted the loans did not have deficiencies, after receiving reimbursement, to initiate foreclosure proceedings.
- Impact on Judicial Integrity: Allowing BNY Mellon to benefit from these contradictory positions without accountability would erode the integrity of the judicial system and undermine public confidence in the fairness of legal proceedings.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here’s the enhanced version of your statement:
---
- Emphasizing these points is crucial for the following reasons:
- Inconsistent Positions: BNYMT has taken conflicting positions regarding the status of the loans. Initially, they claimed origination deficiencies to justify receiving reimbursement but later asserted the loans did not have deficiencies, after receiving reimbursement, to initiate foreclosure proceedings.
- Impact on Judicial Integrity: Allowing BNY Mellon to benefit from these contradictory positions without accountability would erode the integrity of the judicial system and undermine public confidence in the fairness of legal proceedings.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - Precedent and Fairness: Judicial estoppel is designed to protect the integrity of the courts by preventing parties from manipulating the legal system through inconsistent claims. - BNYMT’s actions need to be scrutinized and appropriately addressed. This situation potentially involves multiple legal violations, including:
- Fraud: Misrepresenting the status of the debt as secured.
- Bank Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a scheme to defraud financial institutions.
- Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO, * U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
- Precedent and Fairness: Judicial estoppel is designed to protect the integrity of the courts by preventing parties from manipulating the legal system through inconsistent claims.
- BNYMT’s actions need to be scrutinized and appropriately addressed. This situation potentially involves multiple legal violations, including:
- Fraud: Misrepresenting the status of the debt as secured.
- Bank Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a scheme to defraud financial institutions.
- Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO, * U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
- Precedent and Fairness: Judicial estoppel is designed to protect the integrity of the courts by preventing parties from manipulating the legal system through inconsistent claims.
- BNYMT’s actions need to be scrutinized and appropriately addressed. This situation potentially involves multiple legal violations, including:
- Fraud: Misrepresenting the status of the debt as secured.
- Bank Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a scheme to defraud financial institutions.
- Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO, * U.S.C. § *): Engaging in a pattern of racketeering activity.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *): Involves conducting financial transactions to conceal the origins of illegally obtained money.
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Using electronic communications to carry out a fraudulent scheme.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
- Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *): Involves conducting financial transactions to conceal the origins of illegally obtained money.
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Using electronic communications to carry out a fraudulent scheme.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, here's your enhanced statement:
---
- Money Laundering (* U.S.C. § *): Involves conducting financial transactions to conceal the origins of illegally obtained money.
- Wire Fraud (* U.S.C. § *): Using electronic communications to carry out a fraudulent scheme.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; Background: MERS’ Invalid Assignment and Note Deceptions
An assignment of King’s mortgage, which was in default, was introduced as evidence in the Western Housing Court and Supreme Judicial Court. The assignment claimed that MERS, a third party acting solely as the nominee for CLI without any authorization, had assigned the property to BNYMT on December *, *. The mortgage specifies that “MERS is a separate corporation acting solely as a nominee for the lender and lender's successors and assigns” (See p. *). This assignment occurred nine years after the original refinance lender, CLI, filed liquidating bankruptcy on January *, *.
Here's your enhanced statement:
---
Background: MERS’ Invalid Assignment and Note Deceptions
An assignment of King’s mortgage, which was in default, was introduced as evidence in the Western Housing Court and Supreme Judicial Court. The assignment claimed that MERS, a third party acting solely as the nominee for CLI without any authorization, had assigned the property to BNYMT on December *, *. The mortgage specifies that “MERS is a separate corporation acting solely as a nominee for the lender and lender's successors and assigns” (See p. *). This assignment occurred nine years after the original refinance lender, CLI, filed for liquidating bankruptcy on January *, *.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
---
Background: MERS’ Invalid Assignment and Note Deceptions
An assignment of King’s mortgage, which was in default, was introduced as evidence in the Western Housing Court and Supreme Judicial Court. The assignment claimed that MERS, a third party acting solely as the nominee for CLI without any authorization, had assigned the property to BNYMT on December *, *. The mortgage specifies that “MERS is a separate corporation acting solely as a nominee for the lender and lender's successors and assigns” (See p. *). This assignment occurred nine years after the original refinance lender, CLI, filed for liquidating bankruptcy on January *, *.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - In the Matter of Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Pleadings and Documents Irregularities, it was confirmed that MERS and MERSCORP do not have beneficial interest in promissory notes. In Bank of New York v. Silverberg, it was held that MERS lacked the right to foreclose as it never possessed the promissory note, which mirrors their position regarding King’s note.
- UCC § *-* (*) specifies that mere ownership or possession of a note is insufficient to qualify an individual as a holder. MERS failed to comply with the process governing the transfer of an instrument, and it could only act on behalf of the original lender or its purported assignee, both of which were no longer operational.
Case Rating: *
---
Here's your enhanced statement:
---
- In the Matter of Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Pleadings and Documents Irregularities: It was confirmed that MERS and MERSCORP do not have beneficial interest in promissory notes. In Bank of New York v. Silverberg, it was held that MERS lacked the right to foreclose as it never possessed the promissory note, which mirrors their position regarding King’s note.
- UCC § *-* (*): Specifies that mere ownership or possession of a note is insufficient to qualify an individual as a holder. MERS failed to comply with the process governing the transfer of an instrument, and it could only act on behalf of the original lender or its purported assignee, both of which were no longer operational.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
---
Here's your enhanced statement:
---
- In the Matter of Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Pleadings and Documents Irregularities: It was confirmed that MERS and MERSCORP do not have beneficial interest in promissory notes. In Bank of New York v. Silverberg, it was held that MERS lacked the right to foreclose as it never possessed the promissory note, which mirrors their position regarding King’s note.
- UCC § *-* (*): Specifies that mere ownership or possession of a note is insufficient to qualify an individual as a holder. MERS failed to comply with the process governing the transfer of an instrument, and it could only act on behalf of the original lender or its purported assignee, both of which were no longer operational.
---
Would you like any further assistance?
- King’s promissory note was never legitimately endorsed to MERS. They did not take possession nor were assigned it; therefore, they had no right to collect any debt or transfer any authorization they did not possess.
On July *, * MERS announce via Reuters News that they would no longer be affiliated with any mortgage assignments; not to mention that they could only act on behalf of the original lender who in this Case was in liquidating bankruptcy.
Even if they had the nonexistent assignment of the King’s property, without possession of the Promissory Note along with authenticated evidence of how they obtained it, they did not have holders’ rights and were not entitled to any payments.
Case Rating: *
Hey ****, this looks like a potentially high-value case involving multiple legal issues and significant financial implications. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Here’s the enhanced statement:
---
- King’s promissory note was never legitimately endorsed to MERS. They did not take possession nor were assigned it; therefore, they had no right to collect any debt or transfer any authorization they did not possess.
- On July *, *, MERS announced via Reuters News that they would no longer be affiliated with any mortgage assignments; not to mention that they could only act on behalf of the original lender who, in this case, was in liquidating bankruptcy.
- Even if they had the nonexistent assignment of King’s property, without possession of the Promissory Note along with authenticated evidence of how they obtained it, they did not have holders’ rights and were not entitled to any payments.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Hey ****, this looks like a potentially high-value case involving multiple legal issues and significant financial implications. Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case?
If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Here’s the enhanced statement:
---
- King’s promissory note was never legitimately endorsed to MERS. They did not take possession nor were assigned it; therefore, they had no right to collect any debt or transfer any authorization they did not possess.
- On July *, *, MERS announced via Reuters News that they would no longer be affiliated with any mortgage assignments; not to mention that they could only act on behalf of the original lender who, in this case, was in liquidating bankruptcy.
- Even if they had the nonexistent assignment of King’s property, without possession of the Promissory Note along with authenticated evidence of how they obtained it, they did not have holders’ rights and were not entitled to any payments.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - Debt collectors were aware they had no right to enforce Mr. King's promissory note with only an unauthenticated mortgage assignment. In *Adam vs. Madison Realty*, Third Circuit, July *, *, it was ruled that an assignee must prove ownership and control of the promissory note. An endorsement must be written by or on behalf of the holder and on the instrument or on a paper firmly attached to it.
- The debt collector failed to provide authenticated evidence of foreclosure on the promissory note, rendering any actions inadmissible under Massachusetts state law.
Sure, here’s your enhanced statement:
---
- Debt collectors were aware they had no right to enforce Mr. King's promissory note with only an unauthenticated mortgage assignment. In *Adam vs. Madison Realty*, Third Circuit, July *, *, it was ruled that an assignee must prove ownership and control of the promissory note. An endorsement must be written by or on behalf of the holder and on the instrument or on a paper firmly attached to it.
- The debt collector failed to provide authenticated evidence of foreclosure on the promissory note, rendering any actions inadmissible under Massachusetts state law.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
---
- Debt collectors were aware they had no right to enforce Mr. King's promissory note with only an unauthenticated mortgage assignment. In *Adam vs. Madison Realty*, Third Circuit, July *, *, it was ruled that an assignee must prove ownership and control of the promissory note. An endorsement must be written by or on behalf of the holder and on the instrument or on a paper firmly attached to it.
- The debt collector failed to provide authenticated evidence of foreclosure on the promissory note, rendering any actions inadmissible under Massachusetts state law.
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Please enhance; - In Attorney Fumarola’s affidavit for summary judgment, he submitted three undated fabrications resembling allonges, suggesting they were affixed to the note and fraudulently assigned to Countrywide Bank and Countrywide Home Loans. - These fabricated allonges were glued to an unrecognized, partially signed adjustable-rate note—an act of deception. - These fabrications were signed by Michelle Sjolander, notorious for her involvement in robo-signings, and implicated BNYMT, Bank of America Home Loans, and Countrywide in a scheme to unlawfully seize King’s home. (See pp. *-*).
Sure, here's the enhanced statement:
---
- In Attorney Fumarola’s affidavit for summary judgment, he submitted three undated fabrications resembling allonges, suggesting they were affixed to the note and fraudulently assigned to Countrywide Bank and Countrywide Home Loans.
- These fabricated allonges were glued to an unrecognized, partially signed adjustable-rate note—an act of deception.
- These fabrications were signed by Michelle Sjolander, notorious for her involvement in robo-signings, and implicated BNYMT, Bank of America Home Loans, and Countrywide in a scheme to unlawfully seize King’s home (See pp. *-*).
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
---
- In Attorney Fumarola’s affidavit for summary judgment, he submitted three undated fabrications resembling allonges, suggesting they were affixed to the note and fraudulently assigned to Countrywide Bank and Countrywide Home Loans.
- These fabricated allonges were glued to an unrecognized, partially signed adjustable-rate note—an act of deception.
- These fabrications were signed by Michelle Sjolander, notorious for her involvement in robo-signings, and implicated BNYMT, Bank of America Home Loans, and Countrywide in a scheme to unlawfully seize King’s home (See pp. *-*).
---
Would you like to be connected to local lawyers who can better assist you with your case? If yes, please answer the following questions to proceed:
*. What is your name?
*. What is your phone number?
*. What is your zipcode?
Start a new chat