Foreclosure Sales: When Does a Debtor Lose the Ability to Interfere with the Sale?

BankruptcyRealEstateInsights's avatarBankruptcy-RealEstate-Insights

In re Vertullo, 593 B.R. 92 (Bankr. D. N.H. 2018) –

A mortgagee that sold a chapter 13 debtor’s home in a prepetition foreclosure auction but had not yet recorded a foreclosure deed sought relief from the automatic stay in order to evict the debtor. In the meantime, the debtor filed a plan that proposed to cure the prepetition mortgage defaults and continue payments. The bankruptcy court had to decide whether the mortgagee had completed the foreclosure sale within the meaning of the Bankruptcy Code and whether the debtor retained sufficient interest in the property to allow her to exercise a right to cure the mortgage defaults.

View original post 809 more words

AMERICANS AGAINST FORECLOSURES ( AAF ) EVIDENCE OF JUDGES ON THE TAKE IN UNLAWFUL FORECLOSURES?

American Homeowners have known for over a decade that lower court judges were either in over their heads when it came to securitization/rehypothecation foreclosures, incapable of deciphering rule of law, or protecting their personal portfolios where much of their mutual funds investments are loaded with worthless UNREGULATED DERIVATIVES.

AXJ's avatarAXJ USA GLOBAL NEWS NETWORK

AMERICANS AGAINST FORECLOSURES ( AAF ) EVIDENCE OF JUDGES ON THE TAKE IN UNLAWFUL FORECLOSURES?

Apparently the worse nightmare for over 2mm homeless families as a result of unlawful foreclosures has just come true. Judges might have been on the take and not objective according to a recent testimony by a Judge in Florida.

Americans Against Foreclosures ( AAF ) has decided to join the independent international civil and political rights Organization known as Actions for Justice ( AXJ ) to investigate and get to the bottom of it. www.aaf.news

View original post

Securitization is NOT a “Traditional Mortgage Loan” Operation

The securitization/rehypothecation scheme relies on USPTO patents to make the corruption appear to be legal and approved by the federal government. Are “traditional mortgages” new inventions? Where are the laws for these quasi-securities transactions? If they don’t exist, are these transactions even legal? Remember, American Homeowners had no disclosure that their properties were being gambled on Wall Street – over and over and over.

Deadly Clear's avatarDeadly Clear

patent-hero-size-100019219-gallerySecuritization is a relatively new innovation given the operation of the traditional mortgage loan industry over the last 70 years.

What is routinely overlooked is the fact that this entire new process and product development has been patented in the USTPO extensively by the banks. The loans that were sold at the turn of the century through present day are NOT traditional mortgage loans. This fact is further complicated because there was no meeting of the minds when the contracts were formed. Additionally, there are multiple defects that should literally void documents or cause defective products to be recalled.

View original post 1,777 more words

Short Videos on “The Men Who Stole the World”

Like all of us if you are here, you have asked for the last decade, why? Why were bank mortgage patents made with a focus on foreclosure? Why was HAMP a scam? Why didn’t Homeowners get bailed out instead of the banks? Why can’t judges see the fraud & corruption. Here’s a start to the answers we are all searching for. This is not a conspiracy theory – this is truth and you will know it in your gut when you hear this. https://youtu.be/6cYZ8dUgPuU

The Securitization Debacle – A U.S. Pension Shortfall: $3.4 Trillion+ [$3,400,000,000,000]

People are wondering why unions are dwindling – it’s because of the securitization/rehypothecation scheme targeted unions to invest in their UNREGULATED DERIVATIVES,.while Congress has done nothing to stop it. Union busting? Globalism? Agenda 21?

Deadly Clear's avatarDeadly Clear

By Sydney Sullivan

looting the pension fundsShortfall. Unfunded. Underfunding. Sounds like a minimal pension issue – however, it is anything but that. You may have heard the words “shortfall” when your state refers to it’s government budget or pension plan; and, if you are young (say, under 40), you’ve probably not given it a second thought. Just so you know “shortfall” is defined as “a failure to come up to expectation or need” and at 40 it seems like there will be plenty of time and ways to make up a shortfall… not so much when you are 60.

If you’re like many Americans, you’re worried about retirement. Maybe before the new century securitization scheme was launched, a “shortfall” might have been more easily explained and handled. But after 2000, the Wall Street securities system ramped up and took deficits to a new high while lining the pockets of Wall Street traders. How did this happen?

View original post 2,292 more words