Tag Archives: E-SIGN

Is the Promissory Note Even Enforceable?

Posted on by
27

Judge UnEnforceableWhen all is said and done the courts come back to the main premise, “Did you pay?”. That is so injudicious on so many levels. The deeper we get into securitization and contract law we soon realize (after dissection) there is one very basic question being ignored – “Is the Promissory Note even enforceable?”

Sheila Bair’s (former FDIC Chairperson) new book, Bull By the Horns, addresses issues that must be taken into careful consideration when considering the validity of foreclosures – and she does it with impressive candor. Sheila separates the MBS into 2 categories: Continue reading →

THE HISTORY AND DEATH OF MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC. ACCORDING TO THE USPTO

Posted on by
25

bamboozledFor nearly 20 years, in particular, the last 10 years, the courts, foreclosure defense attorneys, homeowners and politicians have been bamboozled by the blur and use of “MERS” – the service mark for the MERS® eRegistry system owned and operated now by MERSCORP Holdings, Inc.

“MERS” first became the acronym, an abbreviation for the first Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., in 1995. This corporation was registered in Delaware on October 16, 1995. In 1997 Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. registered “MERS” as the service mark with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) for its mortgage loan eRegistry system. This original MERS corporation has long since been eaten up by other entities created by its executives and board of directors to replace it over the past 18 years. Bottom-line: The original Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. is dead and it died in 1998… RIP

Continue reading →

MERS – TOO MANY DEAD DUCKS

Posted on by
32

patent_officeWhile fishing for bank-related patents this gem surfaced and jumped into the net.  At first it wasn’t apparent it was a keeper because the UETA issue has not been in the forefront of foreclosure defense. However, taking the time to dissect the document it became apparent that, as some of us have suspected, there is a mandatory methodology from the origination of the mortgage loan on a trip to the securitized trust that includes the EXPLICIT CONSENT of the obligor (homeowner).

Yup… It appears the road to securitization needs an electronic record that the “issuer” aka the “obligor” has explicitly consented to at the time of origination. Yeah, ya think maybe that was the real intention of MERS aka Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.? But it looks like it didn’t have all its ducks in a row. This is a lot to digest – but you need to know and understand this information in order to plead your case correctly before the courts. Continue reading →