Debtor Has Standing to Argue Failure to Comply with Terms of PSA

Posted by NCBRC –  December 20, 2012 A Michigan state court found that a debtor may oppose foreclosure on the basis that the assignment of the mortgage to the foreclosing party was in violation of the Pooling and Service Agreement and, therefore, ineffective. HSBC Bank, USA v. Young, No. 11-693 (Cir....

BREAKING NEWS! Dr. James Kelley Joins BPIA as “Computer Generated Forgery Expert.”

BP Investigative Agency is proud to announce its newest member to the team, Dr. James Kelley. Dr. Kelley has 30 years experience in military and commercial computer systems and has developed and sold computers and software around the world. He is now applying his computer skills to the detection of forgeries...

Court Systems Wakes up to Loan Securitization

sanduskyregister.com | Nov 15, 2012 By Daniel L. McGookey Four years ago, when the housing market bubble burst,  and I became   involved in securitized mortgage loan defense (not simply  foreclosure   defense), I learned our judicial system was like a sleeping giant – it   was going to take courts...

Are We closer To “Checkmate?” – Kim v. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.

If all other states come to the same conclusion as the MI Supreme Court, then Chase has nowhere left to go. This is because both Chase and the FDIC have both stated under oath that no specific schedule of assets was ever produced by the FDIC, or by Chase, per the requirements of the “Purchase &...

MO US Dist Ct: Ball v. DBNTC – mtd denied – borrower right to claim no owner of loan under PSA

Hat tip to Charles Cox. This is a fantastic argument and analysis by the Fed Court in Missouri. FINALLY, a Judge who listens and understands! This argument is a door opener that leads to a path for “Quiet Title” if your loan has been securitized into a private MBS trust. Get a free securitization...

CA Appellate Brief – Paatalo’s Expert Testimony

Excerpt 1 STATEMENT OF FACTS The court refused to acknowledge Gates is not trying to avoid a debt and will cure arrears once a real beneficiary is identified. Respondents are not/never were owner, note holder, or beneficiary. They failed to answer a verified complaint to deny his allegations, and failed to...