This is just the tip of the iceberg. Couple this issue with the fact that billionaires are bailing out of consumer stock and banks – get your money out now! Remember: “First come – first served.”

page divider

Whether or not you are represented by an attorney understanding the legal system is an asset.  The more you learn, the less likely you are to be taken advantage of or scammed.  Knowledge is power!


Livinglies's Weblog


Each Bank Has All the Money in the World

OK, I get it the numbers ARE staggering, but both BOA and Chase say they own in $75 trillion in derivatives. And their auditors have undertaken no steps to put a value on that. But just taking these two banks together without all the other banks, we are talking $150 TRILLION. That is more than twice the amount of all the money in the world. And now they are about to get assurance in the form of legislation that would guarantee them payment on all credit default swaps and synthetic derivatives — through Federal bailout!!!

Go to Yves Smith’s site and send the letter he suggests. It is critical that this be stopped. And by the way, those derivatives are all credit derivatives which means they…

View original post 91 more words

1 thought on “

  1. thanks and have you put out an alert yet on the bill WASHINGTON BILL SB 1435 or any similar bill and the testimony of the attorney for the title association testifying the below? our readers are in Washingrton also and this testimony is goof for any state. The title companies are of the know there are no notes and no one call sell there house unless counterfiet docs are use or false documentationl

    Dear Legislators,

    I would like to highlight what the title lobbyist Stu Halsan stated this afternoon in the Financial Institutions Committee Hearing regarding HB 1435. He said that if this legislature requires the original promissory note to be required prior to reconveyance, that none of your properties will be able to be reconveyed . If this doesn’t provide you pause to ponder why an original promissory note is not important in this most very important of transactions. ….I’m not sure what will turn your heads. I was totally shocked that the title industry revealed the level of understanding and collusion they are providing the large lending institutions. [jaw dropping testimony}

    What Mr. Halsan is saying is that if you require the financial and title industries to reconvey property using the method that has been required for hundreds of years (which is providing the original note prior to reconveyance), you will literally stop commerce…..that simple fact should tell you all more than what you need to know regarding the felonious business practices of what has gone on in this past decade. And you should not pass this bill that covers up these felonious business practices.

    Since this admission from title now discloses the fact that title insurers are colluding with the big servicing institutions, not only should this legislature not allow this bill to move forward to cover up these reconveyance issues, you need to re-think the Deed of Trust Act requirement in RCW 61.24.030(7)(a) that the only thing required to foreclose will be a Declaration of Ownership from the beneficiary. If the lending institutions cannot provide the original promissory note to reconvey, how can any entity provide a declaration stating that they have standing to foreclose?

    In addition, what I also would like to point out is that none of the panel of testifiers following my testimony refuted any of my claims that these properties are being reconveyed regularly by the large lending institutions with only a “Lost Note Affidavit” and an indemnity agreement between the parties. None of them….not even the representative from the Mortgage Bankers Association refuted this testimony. I have attached Ticor Title’s post-closing instructions that shows this legislature proof that title accepts EITHER an original note OR an indemnity agreement and an original Deed of Trust OR an indemnity agreement be allowed as proof of ownership prior to reconveyance occurring. If the original documentation is not needed why do we have or need contract law anymore? This leads me to question: Is our Insurance Commissioner looking into these thousands of indemnity agreements that the title industry has agreed to and taken stock to see if there is enough cash reserves to back them? Could any of the Senators direct our Insurance Commissioner to take up this form of questioning or investigation?

    Furthermore, Mr. Eliason stated that they have negotiated in good faith and have provided Washington State the most innovative legislation in the nation. If that is so, please inform me why RealtyTrac has stated that Washington State foreclosures are up 172% year-over-year statistically from last year? Washington State has not taken care of the default situation, while the servicing institutions continue to report to you all . And they are most certainly not taking care of the NON-default situations that the lending institutions have created. Why are all these problems popping up that have to do with bad, felonious behavior of our lending institutions?

    Just thought you should know one more piece of information: in Bain v. Metropolitan Mortgage, the WA Supreme Court decided that “MERS is an unlawful beneficiary.” Yet, last week, the homeowners provided our Washington Attorney General with a plethora of Deeds of Trusts from a variety of servicers evidencing MERS as the sole beneficiary, creating an unlawful contract. These servicers continue to defy Washington law, continue to foreclose unlawfully, continue to reconvey without providing proper documentation……what is this legislature prepared to do about all these felonious business practices? I hope you decide NOT to cover up this reconveyance problem with moving this bill forward.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s