"If one of your tellers took a handful of $20 bills out of the cash drawer, they'd probably be looking at criminal charges," Warren tells the bank's CEO.
By Brenda Swanson - HousingWire Newsletter
Bank of America failed to make accurate and complete disclosure to investors and its illegal conduct kept investors in the dark,” said Rhea Kemble Dignam, regional director of the SEC’s Atlanta office. “Requiring an admission of wrongdoing as part of Bank of America’s agreement to resolve the SEC charges filed today provides an additional level of accountability for its violation of the federal securities laws.”
The settlement went on record as the biggest settlement to date, surpassing similar settlements by other banks like JPMorgan Chase (JPM) and Citigroup (C), which reached $13 billion and $7 billion settlements, respectively.
Eric Green, independent monitor of the agreement, stated in the first of his required reports on the bank’s consumer relief activities that the bank claimed a credit of $8,948,684 for the initial batch of 100 first-lien mortgages. This group of 100 mortgages received various modifications – including forgiveness of principal, reduction of interest rates, and bringing delinquent loans current without penalt. The nearly $9 million in credit is how much those modifications cost the bank.
"Examination of the first batch of 100 loans amounts to a test drive, assessing Bank of America's plan for delivering much-needed assistance to homeowners and its methodology for calculating how the assistance qualifies for credit under the settlement agreement," Green said.
"The bank is extending relief to tens of thousands of homeowners, and in coming months we should get a clearer picture of how quickly the bank has delivered on its consumer relief obligations, how much of what kind of relief has been delivered, and where relief has been distributed," he said.
He did note that the first 100 loan modifications are being used mostly to test monitoring standards and procedures but are too small a sample from which to draw all-encompassing conclusions about the consumer relief Bank of America will deliver in the future.
The loan modifications – including forgiveness of principal, reduction of interest rates, and bringing delinquent loans current without penalty – are meant to help struggling homeowners by making their mortgages more affordable.
Bank of America is required to provide $7 billion of consumer relief by Aug. 31, 2018. The categories of relief include not only loan modifications but new loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers, donations toward community reinvestment and neighborhood stabilization and support for affordable low-income rental housing.
"For many, if not most, Americans, family and the family home are core values, at the center of the lives they hope to live. Owning a family home is the dream. Losing that home is the nightmare," Professor Green said. "This settlement agreement acknowledges that the bank has committed to do its part to help repair the dream and avert the nightmare for those still in their homes but struggling with their mortgage payments."
Here is a brief outline of the steps that are normally required for the notary presentment process. Click the link in the top menu or; GO HERE
This is the simple Administrative Technology that we use to help people find a remedy for some of their financial (primarily real estate) issues. It has proven to be a powerful and superior method to produce a solid Administrative Record that can possibly be used as admissible evidence to obtain and enforce a civil court judgment against anyone laying claim to your property.
Here is a brief outline of the steps that are normally required for the notary presentment process. Click the link in the top menu or; GO HERE
We truly hope this information helps you acquire the remedy that you are seeking regarding all of your debt issues.
Tips & Tactics
Video | Learn More | American Justice Foundation
Stopping Lawyer Tricks ...
Please read the testimonials at right! →Just a quick tip today.
Lawyers cannot "testify".
They do it anyway.
Because people allow it!
The rules forbid it.
You can stop it, if you do what I teach!
You must stop it, if you want to win!
This mid-week Tips & Tactics can only touch on this very important point of lawsuit warfare, but do what I say here (and learn the rest in my leading, affordable, case-winning, official Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course that everyone is talking about) and you can stop the lawyer on the other side from cheating!
It's cheating for lawyers to testify.
They lack "legal competence" to act as witnesses!
Lawyers lack personal, first-hand knowledge of the facts of their client's cases. In legal terms, we say they lack the requisite "competence" to testify. The only people who can testify to facts are people who have "personal, first-hand knowledge" of the facts. (More about this in my course.)
YOU MUST STOP LAWYERS FROM TESTIFYING!
They will sneak it in whenever they can. They will do all they can to get into the record facts for which they have no witnesses, documents, or things to prove those facts.
Not only that, but they will "testify to facts" for which they have witnesses just to emphasize the facts, and this too is against the rules.
The rules forbid lawyer testimony!
Learn from me and increase your odds of winning!
Lawyers will sneakily talk about facts that they have no witness to talk about, no documents or other things to use to prove the facts they talk about. They will "tell" the court the facts they cannot prove ... against the rules!
It is cheating of the highest order!
But, they will do it ... if you allow it!
It is against the rules ... rules that are your friend!
If you allow it, you weaken your case.
If you allow enough of it, you will lose!
Not enough time today to go into detail about this, but the next time the lawyer on the other side starts leading his own witness or telling the court what the facts are, you jump to your feet and say, "Objection, your Honor. Counsel is testifying. Counsel lacks personal first-hand knowledge of the facts to which he (or she) is testifying. Move to strike."
If the judge allows the cheating to continue, object again!
Many lawyers are afraid of the judges, so if you hire a lawyer and pay the lawyer good money, don't be surprised when your lawyer (who is taking your good money) fails to object when his friend the lawyer on the other side begins to testify! If you have a lawyer, insist that your lawyer objects to any introduction of facts by lawyers on the other side!
People pay lawyers to fight for them, but many lawyers refuse to fight the judge!
But, fighting judges is part of what it takes to win!
And, objecting forcibly is part of the tactic of winners!
If you don't have a lawyer, YOU MUST OBJECT!
Now is the time to order my affordable, case-winning Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course and study it carefully so you don't find yourself behind the 8-ball when it comes time to argue in court ... at hearings or at trial.
Winning is easy if you learn what I teach in my course!
I know what it takes to win. I practiced law nearly 25 years. I can help you, if you're willing to learn from me!
Pro se people often do not get justice.
Let's examine a few facts:
- Most pro se people don't know the rules.
- Most pro se people don't know how to prevent the lawyer on the other side from playing tricks with the rules.
- Most pro se people make assumptions about what is "admissible evidence" and stuff that isn't.
- Most pro se people don't know how to draft their pleadings or motions properly.
- Most pro se people don't know why it's important to write proposed orders for the judge to sign.
- Most pro se people don't know why, when, or how to make effective objections in court.
- Most pro se people don't understand what facts are critical to winning a case and what facts are of no consequence but only muddy the waters with court-confusing insignificance.
- Most pro se people don't know why it's so vitally important to cite controlling appellate cases in support of their pre-trial and trial motions.
- Most pro se people don't know how to arrange for a written transcript to be made of all proceedings before the court, so they can control the judge.
- Most pro se people waste valuable court time with non-essentials, fail to appreciate the needs of others who have their own problems to bring before the court and, as a consequence, tend to make judges dread pro se cases.
Pro se people who know what I explain so simply in the official Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course are winning and even getting compliments from judges and even opposing lawyers ... because they do it right!
Read the testimonials at right! ⇒
Not all judges are "against" pro se people "just because they are pro se". Most of the judges I knew in my 25 years were good people who cared about other people and did their best to guarantee justice according to the rules.
But! You must know how to protect yourself!
Pro se parties who know the rules and how to use them to protect themselves from courroom corruption the way my Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course makes so easy-to-understand don't let crooked lawyers get away with their smoke-and-mirrors tricks!
Read the testimonials at right! ⇒
It does no good to complain after losing.
The difference between winners and losers is the fact that winners learn how to win!
If you want to make it complicated and muddy the pond with all kinds of nutty arguments, you can do so, make the judge angry, and lose when your "evidence" isn't admitted because it isn't "admissible evidence", etcetera.
You can demand your Constitutional Rights, instead of learning about causes of action and their elements that win lawsuits, and you will lose.
You can refuse to learn the rules of evidence, the rules of procedure, and the tactics and strategies my course is so popular for making easy to learn, and you will lose!
If you want to win, get my affordable Jurisdictionary step-by-step 24-hour course now and master the case-winning strategies and tactics I used for 25 years as a case-winning lawyer in state and federal courts.
If you're paying a lawyer, know what your lawyer should be doing to earn his fee and win your case.
If you don't have a lawyer, know what you must do to force the judge do what's right and prevent the lawyer on the other side from cheating.
It's that simple.
My affordable, popular, official Jurisdictionary 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit course will show you how to prepare orders, write powerful pleadings, draft and argue motions, object in court, get admissible evidence into the record, prevent the other side from getting lies into the record, do legal research, compose your legal arguments, and much, much more.
Read the testimonials at right! ⇒
You'll learn how to avoid filing an answer by moving the court to dismiss or strike the complaint or require a confusing or poorly-worded complaint to be re-written.
You'll learn how to use effective discovery tools to force the other side to produce facts that may lead to admissible evidence.
You'll discover how to move the court and demand that the judge enforce your legal rights.
In short, you'll learn how to save money, maximize your winning power, and resolve conflicts peacefully and profitably ... according to the rules!
Once you master the simple concepts I teach, you'll be more powerful than most lawyers I met in 25 years as a licensed lawyer in state and federal courts as a licensed bar attorney!
Of course you cannot learn all you need to know about what it takes to win by waiting for my Tips & Tactics each week. You need to learn the case-winning tactics in my affordable Jurisdictionary course that will show you what it takes to win, step-by-step in just 24-hours.
Whether plaintiff or defendant, you cannot hope to win if you don't know what my course teaches.
These tips should convince you to order my complete course ... whether you're a plaintiff or defendant.
If you don't know what opportunities you have in court, you don't have much of a chance of winning!
Let me urge you to order my course today (if you don't already have it) so you won't make the common mistake of assuming you already know everything you need to win!
Remember: Winners are people who know how the game is played to win -- whether plaintiff or defendant.
- - - - - - -
The essential tools and elements are explained in the video you can watch right now by clicking the judge.
You won't believe me, but most lawyers (and nearly all law school professors) don't have a clue what it takes to win. Many law schools don't teach "causes of action" or the elements necessary to prevail. It's true!
Many law schools don't teach how to use your five (5) discovery tools or why you must be courageous and fight the judge and demand your right to get evidence in the record using your discovery tools.
Many lawyers are afraid to upset judges, so they let things slide. They don't object. They don't "instruct" the judge on the law. They just lay back, take their hourly fee, and let their clients lose ... and those who pay lawyers yet don't know what Jurisdictionary teaches about winning are led to the slaughter by their own lawyer.
Sad, but true!
I know what it takes to win. I did this 25 years!
My Jurisdictionary will show you how in just 24-hours, step-by-step!
The Jurisdictionary Method wins lawsuits!
Watch my video and see for yourself how easy it is to use knowledge, stealth, and wisdom to win in court!
See what's important, what's not, and how to focus all your energy where it belongs: getting court orders!
If you gain from watching my video, please forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS by hitting "Forward" on your email program now.
Or use this link to send an email to all your friends. You probably know people who need to knock down judges and overcome crooked lawyers and their dishonest tricks. They will thank you for turning them on to this!
Or, do both! Forward this newsletter AND send emails to friends fighting in court who desperately need to know how to win!
Most lawyers never learn what Jurisdictionary makes so easy-to-learn. People have been telling me since I started Jurisdictionary in 1997 that, "Your course should be required in first year law school." But, of course, that's not likely to happen, because what Jurisdictionary shows you isn't politically correct! I teach you how to control judges, instead of bowing to them, I I teach you how to overcome crooked lawyers and their all-too-common sneaky tricks!
Political correctness prevents justice too often!
Winning lawsuits is a brutal axe fight!
Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
Thousands of people just like you are winning with my easy-to-learn 24-hour step-by-step course. Ask anyone who has my course. Everyone loves it!
If you don't know what my course teaches, you lose!
End of story!
Winners do what Jurisdictionary makes easy-to-learn and don't wait until trial to get justice!
Those who learn my affordable 24-hour step-by-step Jurisdictionary self-help course win ... no matter how high the odds are stacked against them!
Yes! Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
Winners know how to fight to win!
Losers believe internet fables. Losers get their legal education at the barbershop or on websites or expensive weekend seminars run by people who never practiced law, never went to law school, and don't know mud from sand about rules or how to use them to control judges.
Too many good folks believe mythological silver-bullet easy solutions to their legal problems and, as a result, are losing when they would be winning if they knew what I make so easy-to-learn in my Jurisdictionary course!
The internet is infested with hare-brained schemes that sound too good to be true ... and, like the old adage says, "If it sounds to good to be true, it probably isn't."
Remember: The most dangerous falsehoods are ones we most want to believe!
Why not learn from a real lawyer with nearly 25 years of case-winning experience?
My course is not expensive!
People who finish my course say an average 8th grader can learn it all in a single weekend.
Please read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
If you have a lawyer, you will save thousands in legal fees by knowing what your lawyer should be doing, and at the same time you will maximize your chances for success by making certain your lawyer does what should be done, instead of taking you for a ride to the poorhouse - as happens to too many good people these days.
If you don't have a lawyer, you'll know how to stop the opponent's crooked tricks and control the judge!
To learn more, go to: www.Jurisdictionary.com========================
My affordable 24-hour step-by-step lawsuit self-help course includes:
- 5-hour video CD simplifies process of litigation
- 2 audio CDs present tactics and procedures
- 15 tutorials on a 4th CD go beyond the basics
- Free EasyGuide to the Rules of Court
- Temporary online access while CDs in Mail
Save legal fees!
Defeat crooked lawyers!
Call Toll Free for details: 866-Law-Easy
Get your competitive edge before the price increase.
Force judges to enforce the rules, instead of allowing the lawyer on the other side twist the law against you!
You cannot win if you don't know how to control the judge and all the lawyers (including your own lawyer, if you can afford to pay one to go to court for you)!
You've heard the horror stories from others.
Don't let it happen to you!
Know the rules and how to force everyone to obey!
Know how to draft proper pleadings, how to get your own evidence in the court's record, how to keep the other side from getting their evidence in, how to move the court to enter orders favorable to your cause, and how to use your Jurisdictionary legal know-how and case-winning strategies to control the judge and win your case!
My self-help course is presented in such an easy format people tell us an 8th grader can learn it in just 24 hours!
Know what you must know to win!
Stop courtroom corruption!
I'll show you how in just 24-hours ... step-by-step!
Control judges and lawyers - or lose!
My "Tips & Tactics" newsletters are only introductions to the complete course you need to win. If you don't already have my 24-hour step-by-step self-help course, go to my website and order now!
Read the testimonials in the right column ⇒
As Woody Guthrie used to sing, "This Land is our Land," and that includes every courtroom and every courthouse from San Diego to Bangor, Maine. Why let lawyers control our lives with trickery? Why let judges destroy our lives by letting lawyers get away with their trickery?
YOU CAN WIN!
Forward this newsletter to ALL YOUR FRIENDS!
If you aren't involved in a lawsuit or threatened with one today, learn what my course teaches and help others who will be destroyed by all-too-common courtroom corruption if YOU don't help them learn what it takes to win!
There are more than 150 lawsuits filed every minute in the United States - nearly 100 million each year. Try to imagine how many thousands of good, honest people will be destroyed in the next 7 days just because they have no idea how to protect themselves and have nobody they can trust (or afford) to help them win!
Urge everyone to get my affordable 24-hour course!
Do it for your nation ... and for your children!
Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD
We pay you $24.90 for every affiliate link sale!
Every time anyone clicks your link and buys the course, you'll receive $24.90
Some of our affiliates earn hundreds of dollars each month just by posting their affiliate link. They write a few words next to the link telling people why they should order the course. Some use testimonials of their own successes to convince people to click their link and order. A few folks are using colorful banners or other ways to promote their affiliate link.
Once you set your coded link in the footer/signature of all your outgoing emails, social networking pages, and web pages you control, there's nothing more to do but sit back and wait for your checks to arrive in the mail!
And, you get the satisfaction of helping others!
Sign up now. Post your link. Start earning easy money!
Click the link on the left of any Jurisdictionary page to get started today!
Got questions about lawsuits?
Get FREE answers on our Lawsuit Q&A Forums.
The link is on the left of every Jurisdictionary page.
Browse the posts.
If you wish to post a question in an existing thread or start a new thread, click the "register" button at the top-right of the main screen and respond to the confirmation email you receive after you register. A moderator will review your application and approve you a few hours later so you can post.
All posts are moderated for your protection.
Once registered, you can ask questions and answer other people's questions.
Jurisdictionary answers questions, too!
Go to Jurisdictionary now!
If you don't already have my course order now!
People tell us it's so easy an 8th grader can do it!
If you already have my course, tell your friends! Tell people about it on Facebook and other social networking sites. Everyone will thank you for it!
Learn why the people who wrote the testimonials in the right column are so thankful. →
Nobody makes it easier than Jurisdictionary!
Dr. Frederick D. Graves, JD
Toll Free: 866-Law-Easy
Testimonials I won every one of 11 cases in which I was victim of identity theft ... all due to the teachings of your Jurisdictionary course. Thank you very much!
... Ralph C.
... Tampa, FloridaI have been using your program for four years and have won every case. Keep up the amazing work!
... John M.
... Phenix City, AL
Your course is awesome!
... L. Price
My attorney ignored my request to file a motion affecting my closed case. Several attorneys said my motion would not be granted. Using your Jurisdictionary course I filed the motion, and it was granted! Praise God! Thank you!
... Phillip S.
... Aurora, Colorado
You are providing an incredible service to society with your course. I have to tell you it's changed my life. Thank you!
... Todd W.
... Baltimore, MD
Defeated a 35-year veteran lawyer I've been fighting the last 3 years. Most of this victory is credited to your course. I can't thank you enough.
... Bill J.
... Columbus, Ohio
Won my appeal in the 2nd District Court in Florida because of your excellent course.
... Roger C.
... Palm Harbor, FL
Without your course I would have been another casualty of the system.
... Basile D.
... Wilson, Wyoming
On 30 January I used what you teach to stop foreclosure. No mortgage. No foreclosure. No note. No foreclosure.
... Ken M.
... Tampa, FL
I have learned more with your course in the past few days than I have learned in the rest of my life, and I am not a young man anymore.
... D. Parker
... Alta Loma CA
Settled my case. Without your course I would never have gotten to 1st base.
... Larry S.
... Orlando, FL
I wish I had known about your course years ago.
... Marilyn E.
... Kapaau, Hawaii
Your 4-CD course is GREAT! Thanks.
... Ramsay D.
... Simi Valley, CA
Jurisdictionary, in my opinion, is the best investment you will ever make: investing in your own "Legal Education" and it works, I promise!!!
... Don H.
Your course is the BOMB! Thank you!
... Lynn C.
Please believe me, you do not know how much you have helped me already. I will continue to tell others about Jurisdictionary. Thank you.
... Esther K.
Thank you for providing your course to people at an affordable price.
... Pete B.
... Charlotte, NC
I have your complete course and have found it to be the most rewarding study of law I have ever read.
... Dan C.
... Denver, Colorado
Another victory! They backed off as soon as they received my demands! You are a prayer answered from the Lord!
... Sam T.
... Dallas, Texas
I bought your course, and it paid off!
... Ruben P.
... Miami, Florida
I learned more in two weeks with your course than I did in 2 years of paralegal school. I feel empowered! Your great course is clear, concise, and systematic.
... Byron P.
... Lansing, Michigan
I've been fighting off 3 collection agencies. I am absolutely ecstatic about my victories. Prior to purchasing your fine program, I was just one of the ignorant societal herd these people prey upon. Your wonderful, user-friendly program is the absolute best $249 I have spent in a long time. My wife overheard the plaintiff's attorney saying, "Don't mess with that guy!" Wow!
... Dr. Donald B., Ph.D.
... St. Louis, Missouri
I ordered your course several weeks ago and am really enjoying the fact that I understand the legal process better than I ever thought I could. Your materials and teaching style are great and very easy to follow.
... Allan D.
... Brainerd, Minnesota
You are completely brilliant. I have never seen/read anything like this. I am eager to get this information out to help others like me. Thank you.
... Sylvia C.
... Kula, Hawaii
I have had so many attorneys take my money and leave me without representation. NEVER AGAIN! My family and I appreciate all you do. God bless you.
... Patricia M.
... Birmingham, Alabama
My attorney kept me in the dark but from your course I learned enough to realize he was trying to take my real estate for himself, and I circumvented him thanks to you!
... Anthony A.
... Decatur, Alabama
I've learned so much that I decided to run for the U.S. Senate seat here. Your course gives me confidence I can be a lawmaker who knows how law is supposed to work.
... Rob T.
... Cumberland, WI
Thanks to your Jurisdictionary site, I learned so much that I won favor with the Magistrate and he ruled favorably on every motion I filed. I thank God for your web site, and thank you too!
... U. Lowe
... Cincinnati, Ohio
Your cause is urgently important.
... William M.
... Northfield, MN
I call it "empowering the people" when I preach Jurisdictionary!
... Charlie H.
... Haw River, NC
Thank you for your guidance and the time and effort you've put into the American Dream.
... Andrea M.
... Brunswick, Maine
You are one in a million!
... Louis D.
... Mesa, Arizona
Thank you for your hard labor and mission. Well done!
... Steven W.
... Oklahoma City, OK
I wish, oh how I wish, I found this information sooner. However, I am well armed now. Your tutorials are my most valuable resource in protecting my rights.
... Adeline F.
... Hanover Park, Illinois
I have learned more in the last few days than I could have in years on my budget.
... David P.
... Alta Loma, California
I consider you a hero for the course you've produced and the heart reasoning that prompted you to do it.
... Ivanov P.
... Homestead, Florida
Your information was an angel on my shoulder helping me through the panic phases.
... D. Christensen
... Sherman Oaks, CA
Since learning from your course my life has changed for the better, and I am finally in control of my formerly overwhelming legal problems.
... Harold C.
... Jersey City, NJ
Thanks to you we are able to get the law in front of the judges and keep them honest.
... S. Rickett
... West Jordan, Utah
Ordered your 24-hour course. Followed your plan. Other side had 3 attorneys. Cleaned their clock using your methods. Their case came down like a ton of bricks when I proved their elements were not there. Thank you!
... Michael L.
... Springville, New York
We filed a Motion to Strike Sham Complaint, like you show in your course. Two hours later the other side called to report they were dismissing the case! We were so happy we were crying with joy. We won! I cannot thank you enough for making it simple to follow.
... Tyler G.
... Olympia, Washington
I recently purchased your Jurisdictionary course and have LOVED absorbing everything.
... Sharon S.
... Tucson, Arizona
Bought Jurisdictionary and am extremely pleased with it.
... Sharon W.
... Pahoa, Hawaii
Your course is nothing short of GENIUS!
... Geoffrey L.
... Bremerton, WA
The knowledge I gained from your program has greatly empowered me. I am thankful to you.
... Leah H.
... Front Royal, Virginia
I bought your course. It's great.
... Linda W.
... Golden, Colorado
The opposing party dismissed their case against me. Thank you for the knowledge and insight you provided through your course.
... Gerald C.
... Tucker, Georgia
Having successfully used your program in divorce/family court, I wish to thank you!
... R.P.F., MD
This is all invaluable information! Thank you for helping me learn!
... Dennis S.
I ordered your course 7/13/09 and am very pleased! Your help is greatly appreciated!
... Samuel J.
Your course is working excellently for me. You make this complicated subject simple to understand and, most importantly, easy to apply in the obscure world of law (obscure no more). Most definitely this is an invaluable tool. I will encourage everyone I know to purchase your course! Thank you, for your great contribution to society.
... Victor P.
I can't thank you enough. Everything about your course was amazing. You made this course for ME.
... Ron P.
I won my motion at a hearing this morning. Other people waiting for their case to be called were surprised that I won, because my English is not so good. You are right. Anybody can do this!
... Julius R.
I've been helped dramatically while listening to your audios. I play them in the background FULL TIME, and in the middle of doing something else something you say makes me do something differently or include something that may have slipped my mind.
... Al H.
Your course is helping very much. It does an excellent job of describing the "big picture" and builds a clear framework of how the whole thing works and hangs together.
... Kate F.
Your course has been a tremendous help in preparing my appeal, and it has helped me spot bad lawyers and judges. I'm better prepared to stand in front of a judge and make the court follow the rules, including the other side.
... Harold S.
... Michael C.
Thanks for the energy you have put forth to let others use the tools of the Law.
... Ken J.
Jurisdictionary has done wonders for my confidence.
... Tarek M.
I have your course and am enthralled with it.
... David S.
Your course sets a second-to-none foundation to understand how the lawsuit process works. I've had several victories! My victories would not be victories, however, had it not been for your teachings.
... Sam T.
I have the defendants right where they belong. I am SO indebted to you!
... Charles H.
Thanks so much for developing the Jurisdictionary Course. I would be out of luck without it.
... Mary B.
I thank you for your course. I've used it successfully!
... Alan P.
I am monitoring my attorney with your advice. Thanks so much, and keep up the great work!
... Nona N.
You present a simple, straightforward process for litigation. Thank you!
... Raymond Z.
I've learned more from you than from any law classes that I've attended.
... Danny G.
I am finding how I've been misled by others who took my money.
... Chandra K.
With your course I have defeated many collection agencies and their lawyers. Your course is excellent!
... Robert S.
Jurisdictionary has given me a greater appreciation of due process. It's amazing!
... Deron B.
This information should be at everyone's disposal.
... Kevin H.
Jurisdictionary has given me the strength and confidence to go before the courts.
... Adrienne M.
It's not a law course. It's a life course! Armed with Jurisdictionary I was able to defeat one of the biggest junk debt companies and their team of 6 lawyers!
... Kevin Z.
You have given me the priceless gift this year of understanding justice.
... Cheryl C.
Keep up the great work. Thanks again so very much.
... Ronald G.
Thanks for all your help. I wouldn't have been able to defend myself without you.
... Kimberly T.
Thank you for making court procedure simple and clear for the pro se.
... Kevin Z.
Using the outlines and motions found in your course, I now have the power to protect myself and my family.
... C. Jones
The course is great!
... Michael S.
I would like to give great testimony as to how comprehensive your course is. I was amazed at how sound your lessons are and how easy it was to understand. I used your method to force the other side to produce the contract they claimed I breached, and when they could not, I filed a motion to dismiss their case. They settled. Thanks very much for your course!
... Joseph R.
American Justice Foundation
Hold Government Accountable for Your God-Given Rights!
Copyright © 2009 Jurisdictionary - ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
c/o Dr. Frederick D. Graves
2744 NW Howard Creek Lane
Stuart, Florida 34994
Toll Free: 866-LAW-EASY (866-529-3279)Unsubscribe | Change Subscriber Options
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
Fair Debt Collection Practices Act
As amended by Public Law 104-208, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996)
To amend the Consumer Credit Protection Act to prohibit abusive practices by debt collectors.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the Consumer Credit Protection Act (15 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new title:
TITLE VIII - DEBT COLLECTION PRACTICES [Fair Debt Collection Practices Act]
801. Short Title
802. Congressional findings and declaration of purpose
804. Acquisition of location information
805. Communication in connection with debt collection
806. Harassment or abuse
807. False or misleading representations
808. Unfair practice
809. Validation of debts
810. Multiple debts
811. Legal actions by debt collectors
812. Furnishing certain deceptive forms
813. Civil liability
814. Administrative enforcement
815. Reports to Congress by the Commission
816. Relation to State laws
817. Exemption for State regulation
818. Effective date
This title may be cited as the "Fair Debt Collection Practices Act."
(a) There is abundant evidence of the use of abusive, deceptive, and unfair debt collection practices by many debt collectors. Abusive debt collection practices contribute to the number of personal bankruptcies, to marital instability, to the loss of jobs, and to invasions of individual privacy.
(b) Existing laws and procedures for redressing these injuries are inadequate to protect consumers.
(c) Means other than misrepresentation or other abusive debt collection practices are available for the effective collection of debts.
(d) Abusive debt collection practices are carried on to a substantial extent in interstate commerce and through means and instrumentalities of such commerce. Even where abusive debt collection practices are purely intrastate in character, they nevertheless directly affect interstate commerce.
(e) It is the purpose of this title to eliminate abusive debt collection practices by debt collectors, to insure that those debt collectors who refrain from using abusive debt collection practices are not competitively disadvantaged, and to promote consistent State action to protect consumers against debt collection abuses.
As used in this title --
(1) The term "Commission" means the Federal Trade Commission.
(2) The term "communication" means the conveying of information regarding a debt directly or indirectly to any person through any medium.
(3) The term "consumer" means any natural person obligated or allegedly obligated to pay any debt.
(4) The term "creditor" means any person who offers or extends credit creating a debt or to whom a debt is owed, but such term does not include any person to the extent that he receives an assignment or transfer of a debt in default solely for the purpose of facilitating collection of such debt for another.
(5) The term "debt" means any obligation or alleged obligation of a consumer to pay money arising out of a transaction in which the money, property, insurance or services which are the subject of the transaction are primarily for personal, family, or household purposes, whether or not such obligation has been reduced to judgment.
(6) The term "debt collector" means any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the collection of any debts, or who regularly collects or attempts to collect, directly or indirectly, debts owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another. Notwithstanding the exclusion provided by clause (F) of the last sentence of this paragraph, the term includes any creditor who, in the process of collecting his own debts, uses any name other than his own which would indicate that a third person is collecting or attempting to collect such debts. For the purpose of section 808(6), such term also includes any person who uses any instrumentality of interstate commerce or the mails in any business the principal purpose of which is the enforcement of security interests. The term does not include --
(A) any officer or employee of a creditor while, in the name of the creditor, collecting debts for such creditor;
(B) any person while acting as a debt collector for another person, both of whom are related by common ownership or affiliated by corporate control, if the person acting as a debt collector does so only for persons to whom it is so related or affiliated and if the principal business of such person is not the collection of debts;
(C) any officer or employee of the United States or any State to the extent that collecting or attempting to collect any debt is in the performance of his official duties;
(D) any person while serving or attempting to serve legal process on any other person in connection with the judicial enforcement of any debt;
(E) any nonprofit organization which, at the request of consumers, performs bona fide consumer credit counseling and assists consumers in the liquidation of their debts by receiving payments from such consumers and distributing such amounts to creditors; and
(F) any person collecting or attempting to collect any debt owed or due or asserted to be owed or due another to the extent such activity (i) is incidental to a bona fide fiduciary obligation or a bona fide escrow arrangement; (ii) concerns a debt which was originated by such person; (iii) concerns a debt which was not in default at the time it was obtained by such person; or (iv) concerns a debt obtained by such person as a secured party in a commercial credit transaction involving the creditor.
(7) The term "location information" means a consumer's place of abode and his telephone number at such place, or his place of employment.
(8) The term "State" means any State, territory, or possession of the United States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or any political subdivision of any of the foregoing.
Any debt collector communicating with any person other than the consumer for the purpose of acquiring location information about the consumer shall --
(1) identify himself, state that he is confirming or correcting location information concerning the consumer, and, only if expressly requested, identify his employer;
(2) not state that such consumer owes any debt;
(3) not communicate with any such person more than once unless requested to do so by such person or unless the debt collector reasonably believes that the earlier response of such person is erroneous or incomplete and that such person now has correct or complete location information;
(4) not communicate by post card;
(5) not use any language or symbol on any envelope or in the contents of any communication effected by the mails or telegram that indicates that the debt collector is in the debt collection business or that the communication relates to the collection of a debt; and
(6) after the debt collector knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with regard to the subject debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney's name and address, not communicate with any person other than that attorney, unless the attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to the communication from the debt collector.
(a) COMMUNICATION WITH THE CONSUMER GENERALLY. Without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, a debt collector may not communicate with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt --
(1) at any unusual time or place or a time or place known or which should be known to be inconvenient to the consumer. In the absence of knowledge of circumstances to the contrary, a debt collector shall assume that the convenient time for communicating with a consumer is after 8 o'clock antimeridian and before 9 o'clock postmeridian, local time at the consumer's location;
(2) if the debt collector knows the consumer is represented by an attorney with respect to such debt and has knowledge of, or can readily ascertain, such attorney's name and address, unless the attorney fails to respond within a reasonable period of time to a communication from the debt collector or unless the attorney consents to direct communication with the consumer; or
(3) at the consumer's place of employment if the debt collector knows or has reason to know that the consumer's employer prohibits the consumer from receiving such communication.
(b) COMMUNICATION WITH THIRD PARTIES. Except as provided in section 804, without the prior consent of the consumer given directly to the debt collector, or the express permission of a court of competent jurisdiction, or as reasonably necessary to effectuate a postjudgment judicial remedy, a debt collector may not communicate, in connection with the collection of any debt, with any person other than a consumer, his attorney, a consumer reporting agency if otherwise permitted by law, the creditor, the attorney of the creditor, or the attorney of the debt collector.
(c) CEASING COMMUNICATION. If a consumer notifies a debt collector in writing that the consumer refuses to pay a debt or that the consumer wishes the debt collector to cease further communication with the consumer, the debt collector shall not communicate further with the consumer with respect to such debt, except --
(1) to advise the consumer that the debt collector's further efforts are being terminated;
(2) to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor may invoke specified remedies which are ordinarily invoked by such debt collector or creditor; or
(3) where applicable, to notify the consumer that the debt collector or creditor intends to invoke a specified remedy.
If such notice from the consumer is made by mail, notification shall be complete upon receipt.
(d) For the purpose of this section, the term "consumer" includes the consumer's spouse, parent (if the consumer is a minor), guardian, executor, or administrator.
A debt collector may not engage in any conduct the natural consequence of which is to harass, oppress, or abuse any person in connection with the collection of a debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:
(1) The use or threat of use of violence or other criminal means to harm the physical person, reputation, or property of any person.
(2) The use of obscene or profane language or language the natural consequence of which is to abuse the hearer or reader.
(3) The publication of a list of consumers who allegedly refuse to pay debts, except to a consumer reporting agency or to persons meeting the requirements of section 603(f) or 604(3)1 of this Act.
(4) The advertisement for sale of any debt to coerce payment of the debt.
(5) Causing a telephone to ring or engaging any person in telephone conversation repeatedly or continuously with intent to annoy, abuse, or harass any person at the called number.
(6) Except as provided in section 804, the placement of telephone calls without meaningful disclosure of the caller's identity.
A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:
(1) The false representation or implication that the debt collector is vouched for, bonded by, or affiliated with the United States or any State, including the use of any badge, uniform, or facsimile thereof.
(2) The false representation of --
(A) the character, amount, or legal status of any debt; or
(B) any services rendered or compensation which may be lawfully received by any debt collector for the collection of a debt.
(3) The false representation or implication that any individual is an attorney or that any communication is from an attorney.
(4) The representation or implication that nonpayment of any debt will result in the arrest or imprisonment of any person or the seizure, garnishment, attachment, or sale of any property or wages of any person unless such action is lawful and the debt collector or creditor intends to take such action.
(5) The threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken or that is not intended to be taken.
(6) The false representation or implication that a sale, referral, or other transfer of any interest in a debt shall cause the consumer to --
(A) lose any claim or defense to payment of the debt; or
(B) become subject to any practice prohibited by this title.
(7) The false representation or implication that the consumer committed any crime or other conduct in order to disgrace the consumer.
(8) Communicating or threatening to communicate to any person credit information which is known or which should be known to be false, including the failure to communicate that a disputed debt is disputed.
(9) The use or distribution of any written communication which simulates or is falsely represented to be a document authorized, issued, or approved by any court, official, or agency of the United States or any State, or which creates a false impression as to its source, authorization, or approval.
(10) The use of any false representation or deceptive means to collect or attempt to collect any debt or to obtain information concerning a consumer.
(11) The failure to disclose in the initial written communication with the consumer and, in addition, if the initial communication with the consumer is oral, in that initial oral communication, that the debt collector is attempting to collect a debt and that any information obtained will be used for that purpose, and the failure to disclose in subsequent communications that the communication is from a debt collector, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a formal pleading made in connection with a legal action.
(12) The false representation or implication that accounts have been turned over to innocent purchasers for value.
(13) The false representation or implication that documents are legal process.
(14) The use of any business, company, or organization name other than the true name of the debt collector's business, company, or organization.
(15) The false representation or implication that documents are not legal process forms or do not require action by the consumer.
(16) The false representation or implication that a debt collector operates or is employed by a consumer reporting agency as defined by section 603(f) of this Act.
A debt collector may not use unfair or unconscionable means to collect or attempt to collect any debt. Without limiting the general application of the foregoing, the following conduct is a violation of this section:
(1) The collection of any amount (including any interest, fee, charge, or expense incidental to the principal obligation) unless such amount is expressly authorized by the agreement creating the debt or permitted by law.
(2) The acceptance by a debt collector from any person of a check or other payment instrument postdated by more than five days unless such person is notified in writing of the debt collector's intent to deposit such check or instrument not more than ten nor less than three business days prior to such deposit.
(3) The solicitation by a debt collector of any postdated check or other postdated payment instrument for the purpose of threatening or instituting criminal prosecution.
(4) Depositing or threatening to deposit any postdated check or other postdated payment instrument prior to the date on such check or instrument.
(5) Causing charges to be made to any person for communications by concealment of the true purpose of the communication. Such charges include, but are not limited to, collect telephone calls and telegram fees.
(6) Taking or threatening to take any nonjudicial action to effect dispossession or disablement of property if --
(A) there is no present right to possession of the property claimed as collateral through an enforceable security interest;
(B) there is no present intention to take possession of the property; or
(C) the property is exempt by law from such dispossession or disablement.
(7) Communicating with a consumer regarding a debt by post card.
(8) Using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector's address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business.
(a) Within five days after the initial communication with a consumer in connection with the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the following information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a written notice containing --
(1) the amount of the debt;
(2) the name of the creditor to whom the debt is owed;
(3) a statement that unless the consumer, within thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes the validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt will be assumed to be valid by the debt collector;
(4) a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector will obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment will be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and
(5) a statement that, upon the consumer's written request within the thirty-day period, the debt collector will provide the consumer with the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor.
(b) If the consumer notifies the debt collector in writing within the thirty-day period described in subsection (a) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or any copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector.
(c) The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under this section may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.
If any consumer owes multiple debts and makes any single payment to any debt collector with respect to such debts, such debt collector may not apply such payment to any debt which is disputed by the consumer and, where applicable, shall apply such payment in accordance with the consumer's directions.
(a) Any debt collector who brings any legal action on a debt against any consumer shall --
(1) in the case of an action to enforce an interest in real property securing the consumer's obligation, bring such action only in a judicial district or similar legal entity in which such real property is located; or
(2) in the case of an action not described in paragraph (1), bring such action only in the judicial district or similar legal entity --
(A) in which such consumer signed the contract sued upon; or
(B) in which such consumer resides at the commencement of the action.
(b) Nothing in this title shall be construed to authorize the bringing of legal actions by debt collectors.
(a) It is unlawful to design, compile, and furnish any form knowing that such form would be used to create the false belief in a consumer that a person other than the creditor of such consumer is participating in the collection of or in an attempt to collect a debt such consumer allegedly owes such creditor, when in fact such person is not so participating.
(b) Any person who violates this section shall be liable to the same extent and in the same manner as a debt collector is liable under section 813 for failure to comply with a provision of this title.
(a) Except as otherwise provided by this section, any debt collector who fails to comply with any provision of this title with respect to any person is liable to such person in an amount equal to the sum of --
(1) any actual damage sustained by such person as a result of such failure;
(2) (A) in the case of any action by an individual, such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000; or
(B) in the case of a class action, (i) such amount for each named plaintiff as could be recovered under subparagraph (A), and (ii) such amount as the court may allow for all other class members, without regard to a minimum individual recovery, not to exceed the lesser of $500,000 or 1 per centum of the net worth of the debt collector; and
(3) in the case of any successful action to enforce the foregoing liability, the costs of the action, together with a reasonable attorney's fee as determined by the court. On a finding by the court that an action under this section was brought in bad faith and for the purpose of harassment, the court may award to the defendant attorney's fees reasonable in relation to the work expended and costs.
(b) In determining the amount of liability in any action under subsection (a), the court shall consider, among other relevant factors --
(1) in any individual action under subsection (a)(2)(A), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, and the extent to which such noncompliance was intentional; or
(2) in any class action under subsection (a)(2)(B), the frequency and persistence of noncompliance by the debt collector, the nature of such noncompliance, the resources of the debt collector, the number of persons adversely affected, and the extent to which the debt collector's noncompliance was intentional.
(c) A debt collector may not be held liable in any action brought under this title if the debt collector shows by a preponderance of evidence that the violation was not intentional and resulted from a bona fide error notwithstanding the maintenance of procedures reasonably adapted to avoid any such error.
(d) An action to enforce any liability created by this title may be brought in any appropriate United States district court without regard to the amount in controversy, or in any other court of competent jurisdiction, within one year from the date on which the violation occurs.
(e) No provision of this section imposing any liability shall apply to any act done or omitted in good faith in conformity with any advisory opinion of the Commission, notwithstanding that after such act or omission has occurred, such opinion is amended, rescinded, or determined by judicial or other authority to be invalid for any reason.
(a) Compliance with this title shall be enforced by the Commission, except to the extend that enforcement of the requirements imposed under this title is specifically committed to another agency under subsection (b). For purpose of the exercise by the Commission of its functions and powers under the Federal Trade Commission Act, a violation of this title shall be deemed an unfair or deceptive act or practice in violation of that Act. All of the functions and powers of the Commission under the Federal Trade Commission Act are available to the Commission to enforce compliance by any person with this title, irrespective of whether that person is engaged in commerce or meets any other jurisdictional tests in the Federal Trade Commission Act, including the power to enforce the provisions of this title in the same manner as if the violation had been a violation of a Federal Trade Commission trade regulation rule.
(b) Compliance with any requirements imposed under this title shall be enforced under --
(1) section 8 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, in the case of --
(A) national banks, by the Comptroller of the Currency;
(B) member banks of the Federal Reserve System (other than national banks), by the Federal Reserve Board; and
(C) banks the deposits or accounts of which are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (other than members of the Federal Reserve System), by the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation;
(2) section 5(d) of the Home Owners Loan Act of 1933, section 407 of the National Housing Act, and sections 6(i) and 17 of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act, by the Federal Home Loan Bank Board (acting directing or through the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation), in the case of any institution subject to any of those provisions;
(3) the Federal Credit Union Act, by the Administrator of the National Credit Union Administration with respect to any Federal credit union;
(4) subtitle IV of Title 49, by the Interstate Commerce Commission with respect to any common carrier subject to such subtitle;
(5) the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, by the Secretary of Transportation with respect to any air carrier or any foreign air carrier subject to that Act; and
(6) the Packers and Stockyards Act, 1921 (except as provided in section 406 of that Act), by the Secretary of Agriculture with respect to any activities subject to that Act.
(c) For the purpose of the exercise by any agency referred to in subsection (b) of its powers under any Act referred to in that subsection, a violation of any requirement imposed under this title shall be deemed to be a violation of a requirement imposed under that Act. In addition to its powers under any provision of law specifically referred to in subsection (b), each of the agencies referred to in that subsection may exercise, for the purpose of enforcing compliance with any requirement imposed under this title any other authority conferred on it by law, except as provided in subsection (d).
(d) Neither the Commission nor any other agency referred to in subsection (b) may promulgate trade regulation rules or other regulations with respect to the collection of debts by debt collectors as defined in this title.
(a) Not later than one year after the effective date of this title and at one-year intervals thereafter, the Commission shall make reports to the Congress concerning the administration of its functions under this title, including such recommendations as the Commission deems necessary or appropriate. In addition, each report of the Commission shall include its assessment of the extent to which compliance with this title is being achieved and a summary of the enforcement actions taken by the Commission under section 814 of this title.
(b) In the exercise of its functions under this title, the Commission may obtain upon request the views of any other Federal agency which exercises enforcement functions under section 814 of this title.
This title does not annul, alter, or affect, or exempt any person subject to the provisions of this title from complying with the laws of any State with respect to debt collection practices, except to the extent that those laws are inconsistent with any provision of this title, and then only to the extent of the inconsistency. For purposes of this section, a State law is not inconsistent with this title if the protection such law affords any consumer is greater than the protection provided by this title.
The Commission shall by regulation exempt from the requirements of this title any class of debt collection practices within any State if the Commission determines that under the law of that State that class of debt collection practices is subject to requirements substantially similar to those imposed by this title, and that there is adequate provision for enforcement.
This title takes effect upon the expiration of six months after the date of its enactment, but section 809 shall apply only with respect to debts for which the initial attempt to collect occurs after such effective date.
Approved September 20, 1977
Public Law 95-109 [H.R. 5294]
HOUSE REPORT No. 95-131 (Comm. on Banking, Finance, and Urban Affairs).
SENATE REPORT No. 95-382 (Comm. on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 123 (1977):
Apr. 4, considered and passed House.
Aug. 5, considered and passed Senate, amended.
Sept. 8, House agreed to Senate amendment.
WEEKLY COMPILATION OF PRESIDENTIAL DOCUMENTS, Vol. 13, No. 39:
Sept. 20, Presidential statement.
SECTION 621, SUBSECTIONS (b)(3), (b)(4) and (b)(5) were amended to transfer certain administrative enforcement responsibilities, pursuant to Pub. L. 95-473, § 3(b), Oct. 17, 1978. 92 Stat. 166; Pub. L. 95-630, Title V. § 501, November 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3680; Pub. L. 98-443, § 9(h), Oct. 4, 1984, 98 Stat. 708.
SECTION 803, SUBSECTION (6), defining "debt collector," was amended to repeal the attorney at law exemption at former Section (6)(F) and to redesignate Section 803(6)(G) pursuant to Pub. L. 99-361, July 9, 1986, 100 Stat. 768. For legislative history, see H.R. 237, HOUSE REPORT No. 99-405 (Comm. on Banking, Finance and Urban Affairs). CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: Vol. 131 (1985): Dec. 2, considered and passed House. Vol. 132 (1986): June 26, considered and passed Senate.
SECTION 807, SUBSECTION (11), was amended to affect when debt collectors must state (a) that they are attempting to collect a debt and (b) that information obtained will be used for that purpose, pursuant to Pub. L. 104-208 § 2305, 110 Stat. 3009 (Sept. 30, 1996).
Excerpt from the "Master Key System"
This is the process by which failure is changed to success. Thoughts of courage, power, inspiration, harmony, are substituted for thoughts of failure, despair, lack, limitation and discord, and as these thoughts take root, the physical tissue is changed and the individual sees life in a new light, old things have actually passed away, all things have become new, he is born again, this time born of the spirit, life has a new meaning for him, he is reconstructed and is filled with joy, confidence, hope, energy. He sees opportunities for success to which he was heretofore blind. He recognizes possibilities which before had no meaning for him. The thoughts of success with which he has been impregnated are radiated to those around him, and they in turn help him onward and upward; he attracts to him new and successful associates, and this in turn changes his environment; so that by this simple exercise of thought, a man changes not only himself, but his environment,
circumstances and conditions.
Charles F. Haanel
Questions for Discovery, Disclosure, and Remedies:
a.) Submission of Original Promissory Note(s) (front and back). _____.
b.) Submission of every Allonge (front and back). _____.
c.) Shown to the Court(s) evidentiary proof of the true Holder(s) and filed Documented proof of Authority for someone to ‘Represent’ or to ‘Act’ for the lawfully - verified and reachable Holder(s). _____.
Yes _____. No _____. I Don’t Know _____.
Published on May 27, 2014
By Tex Mason
The Mortgage Deed in itself does not attach to, nor does it create an enforceable right for the BANK (and their Attorney) to enforce an action (foreclosure) against your property. This is according to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) article 9-203(b).
Why is this an important find?
Before an Attorney can initiate an action to foreclose, the LAW requires that he produce a statute or a contract from which he derives his authority to take such action. Without such authority written in a Law or a Contract, the Bank (or Attorney) has no legal authority to take such action.
Typically, during the initiating of a foreclosure proceeding, the attorney will file a copy of the Mortgage Deed into the court docket. You may not understand what he is doing. He is essentially trying to create the presumption in the court, that the Security Deed conveys or grants the Bank the right to attach to and foreclose against your property.
It is important that you research UCC article 9-210 so you can understand how to apply it in court, in such a way to disprove and diffuse the presumption made by the Attorney.
You may be wondering how is all of this allowed to happen if the Mortgage Deed doesn't authorize such a right. Well ignorance of the law is no excuse. The Attorney is banking on the fact that you are ignorant to the law, and that you will not challenge his authority in the matter.
Now that you know the law, you actually may have a valid counter-claim for "Fraud on the Court"
The attorney knows that the Mortgage Deed doesn't convey a right to foreclose, but he introduced the document to intentional mislead the court and/or to make a false representation.
This is not legal advice and I do not practice law. For more lectures like this and other information visit www.thctrust.org
When financial crimes go unpunished, the root problem of fraud never gets fixed -- and these are the consequences
Article from Salon.com
Joseph and Mary Romero of Chimayo, N.M., found that their mortgage note was assigned to the Bank of New York three months after the same bank filed a foreclosure complaint against them; in other words, Bank of New York didn’t own the loan when they tried to foreclose on it.
Glenn and Ann Holden of Akron, Ohio, faced foreclosure from Deutsche Bank, but the company filed two different versions of the note at court, each bearing a stamp affirming it as the “true and accurate copy.”
Mary McCulley of Bozeman, Mont., had her loan changed by U.S. Bank without her knowledge, from a $300,000 30-year loan to a $200,000 loan due in 18 months, and in documents submitted to the court, U.S. Bank included four separate loan applications with different terms.
All of these examples, from actual court cases resolved over the last two months, rendered rare judgments in favor of homeowners over banks and mortgage lenders. But despite the fact that the nation’s courtrooms remain active crime scenes, with backdated, forged and fabricated documents still sloshing around them, state and federal regulators have not filed new charges of misconduct against Bank of New York, Deutsche Bank, U.S. Bank or any other mortgage industry participant, since the round of national settlements over foreclosure fraud effectively closed the issue.
Many focus on how the failure to prosecute financial crimes, by Attorney General Eric Holder and colleagues, create a lack of deterrent for the perpetrators, who will surely sin again. But there’s something else that happens when these crimes go unpunished; the root problem, the legacy of fraud, never gets fixed. In this instance, the underlying ownership on potentially millions of loans has been permanently confused, and the resulting disarray will cause chaos for decades into the future, harming homeowners, investors and the broader economy. Holder’s corrupt bargain, to let Wall Street walk, comes at the cost of permanent damage to the largest market in the world, the U.S. residential housing market.
By now we know the details: During the run-up to the housing bubble, banks bought up millions of mortgages, packaged them into securities and sold them around the world. Amid the frenzy, lenders failed to follow basic property laws, which ensure legitimate transfers of mortgages from one legal owner to another. When mass foreclosures resulted from the bubble’s collapse, banks who could not demonstrate they owned the loans got caught trying to cover up the irregularities with false documents. Federal authorities made the offenders pay fines, much of which banks paid with other people’s money. But the settlements put a Band-Aid over the misconduct. Nobody went in, loan by loan, to try to equitably confirm who owns what.
Now, the lid banks and the government tried to place on the situation has begun to boil over. For example, Bank of America really wants to exit the mortgage servicing business, because it now finds it unprofitable. The bank entered into a deal to sell off all the servicing for loans backed by the Government National Mortgage Association (often known as Ginnie Mae). But Ginnie Mae refused the sale, because the loans Bank of America serviced are missing critical documents, including the recorded mortgages themselves.
If you’re a mortgage servicer, and you don’t possess the recorded mortgage, you probably aren’t able to foreclose on that loan without fabricating the document. And Ginnie Mae made it clear that the problem could go beyond Bank of America. “I don’t mean to sound like we’re picking on BofA,” Ginnie Mae president Ted Tozer told trade publicationNational Mortgage News. “I can’t say if it’s just BofA or not.” Incredibly, this would represent the first time a government agency has actually examined loan files under its control to search for missing documents, seven years after the collapse of the housing bubble and four years after the recognition of mass document fabrication.
Any effort to fix the system would start by reforming MERS, the electronic database banks use to track mortgage trades (and avoid fees they would incur from county clerks with every transfer). MERS was part of a broad settlement in 2011 with federal regulators, and they promised to improve the quality control over their database to avoid errors and fraudulent assignments. Three years later, the fixes haven’t happened, and four senior officers brought in to comply with the settlement have left. MERS then tried to hire a consultant to manage the settlement terms whom U.S. regulators found unqualified for the job.
The database still tracks roughly half of all U.S. home loans, and banks fear that without changes, they might have to – horrors – actually go back to recording mortgages individually with the county clerks! You know, the property law system that the nation somehow survived under for more than 200 years.
The court cases in Ohio, Montana and New Mexico illustrate that the condition of mortgage documentation remains completely broken. Consistent records from the housing bubble era do not exist, and because the settlements merely tried to make the problem go away, we don’t know precisely how bad a situation we’re dealing with. We do know it will crop up over and over again, with costs for the whole society.
The case of the Holdens in Ohio is a good example. They took out their mortgage in 2005, and it went into the MERS database, with Deutsche Bank eventually buying the loan for a mortgage-backed security. Deutsche Bank attempted a foreclosure on the Holdens in 2011, filing what they called the original promissory note from the mortgage lender, and the various assignments that transferred the loan into their possession. But separately, Deutsche Bank submitted an affidavit with a second promissory note, which had different qualities than the one in the initial filing. Both notes had stamps indicating they were the “true and accurate copy.” This is obviously impossible. The 9th Judicial Court of Appeals in Ohio not only said this discrepancy raised the question of whether Deutsche Bank had possession of the note when they filed foreclosure, but cited numerous other examples of the same issue in separate court cases throughout Ohio. The court overturned the summary judgment for foreclosure on the Holdens’ home.
The Holdens were lucky; they found a clear case of fabricated documents, and a sympathetic court to hear them out. More commonly, homeowners in trouble on their mortgages don’t have the money to pursue justice against large financial institutions with limitless funds. If the banks lose a few cases, that’s an acceptable loss compared to the thousands they win uncontested. Moreover, many homeowners I talked to don’t want to go public, even when they win cases in court, because ultimately, they still have to negotiate with their servicers for an affordable resolution.
“Who cares, these people didn’t pay their mortgages,” respond many – even judges – to this chaos. But anyone with an interest in these loans can be affected by a flawed paper trail without clear chains of ownership. Investors in mortgage-backed securities, including public pension funds, get cheated on loans in their portfolios where nobody can establish ownership. Taxpayers bear the expense of dragged-out foreclosure cases with false documents clogging state courts; efforts to speed up foreclosures in states like Florida have not succeeded, precisely because the raw materials – the documents – are faulty. Homeowners who never missed a payment could run into trouble when title issues prohibit them from selling the house. And I can give you a giant stack of cases of servicer-driven defaults, where false documents merely added another layer of illegality.
Simply put, if you have a mortgage, you are in jeopardy. And with mortgage lending standards loosening, and the government trying to kick-start the same private securitization market for mortgages we saw during the bubble, we could easily see the same shoddiness return on new loans.
There was another solution available here, if Holder’s Justice Department didn’t throw up its hands and settle. Judges could have disassembled the broken mortgage system, and appointed a special master to handle all loans in question. It may have taken years, but the preservation of the public property system makes the time and expense worth it. Unless you would rather kneel to the wishes of the financial industry to keep everything rolling, and let the wound fester.
If you or I pick the lock on a house and try to steal everything in it, we’d probably go to jail. But if I were a bank, and I wrote down on a piece of paper that I simply owned that house, I’d get away with it. That’s the sad legacy of trying to cover up massive fraud instead of dealing with it.