Forensic "Securitization" Auditing, Chain of Title Analysis, Legal Support Services, Bonded & Insured
(I Can’t Get No) “Satisfaction”
The evidence is becoming more clear every day. The securitization scheme has destroyed any semblance of “clear chains of title” to millions of properties across the United States, and continues to operate much like a “Ponzi Scheme.” It is a well established fact that securitization eliminates the ability to identify a “lender” or “creditor to whom the debt is owed.” In the context of foreclosure, the courts care less about chain of title than they do about the party claiming to hold the note with rights to enforce.
But here’s what the courts and homeowners need to understand about title beyond the context of a foreclosure. If a lender and/or “creditor” cannot be identified, then how can a legal “satisfaction of mortgage” or “reconveyance of deed of trust” ever be recorded to clear title? To this day, millions of bogus satisfactions are being executed and recorded by parties who are not the original lender / “creditor,” and who have no verifiable authority to execute and record the documents. The examples are endless, but here are a couple showing the continued garbage being churned out by Nationwide Title Clearing in Florida. (Why NTC is allowed to operate is mindboggling!) The person who executes these two documents is “Susan Schotsch” who is employed by NTC but executes documents as an officer of numerous other entities, some deceased. I know, all too familiar. The first example shows Schotsch executing the document on behalf of MERS as nominee for “Federally Chartered Savings Bank.” This is about as ludicrous as a “DocX” assignment to “Bad Bene.”
No beneficiary has been identified on this document who could have given NTC any authority.
These types of bogus satisfactions beg the question, “Is there still a beneficiary/mortgagee out there with an active and performing deed or mortgage being paid for in a Ponzi Scheme?” And, could any unknown beneficiary / mortgagee rear their head someday and re-enter the chain of title by challenging future mortgagees and “bona fide purchasers?” Here’s a case from a Pennsylvania BK Court that addresses what can happen with a fraudulent or forged satisfaction.
“In this case, it is clear that relief is appropriate against the Debtor as the Debtor was not entitled to have the mortgage satisfied. However, the rights of third parties are also at issue. Although Pennsylvania law determines priority according to the date of recording, priority cannot be determined until the validity of the Satisfaction Piece is resolved.”—–
“From this state of facts it is obvious one of the parties must suffer a serious loss. Neither appears to be in default; neither can complain that he has been misled by the other; hence there is no room for the application of the principle that where one of two innocent parties must suffer, the loss shall fall upon the one whose acts of commission or omission occasioned the injury. It is our business to ascertain where the law places it.Id. 266-67. Ultimately, the court found as follows:
“From this state of facts it is obvious one of the parties must suffer a serious loss. Neither appears to be in default; neither can complain that he has been misled by the other; hence there is no room for the application of the principle that where one of two innocent parties must suffer, the loss shall fall upon the one whose acts of commission or omission occasioned the injury. It is our business to ascertain where the law places it.Id. 266-67. Ultimately, the court found as follows:
The ground of the decision in Lancaster v. Smith was that the satisfaction had been entered without the authority of the mortgagee. It is immaterial whether the want of authority is the result of fraud or of mistake. The authority to enter satisfaction is lacking in either case, and because of its absence the satisfaction is worthless.Id. at 268. The court relied upon the reasoning in Lancaster v. Smith, in which the court
previously held that a mortgagee was not estopped from enforcing a mortgage even against an innocent purchaser where the mortgagee did nothing to mislead the purchaser and her name had been forged on a power of attorney under which satisfaction was entered on the mortgage. See 67 Pa. 427 (1871). Brown has been cited, along with cases from other jurisdictions, in support of the rule that a wrongfully satisfied mortgage survives notwithstanding the existence of a subsequent bona fide purchaser or mortgagee for value.”
——
“By setting aside the forged Satisfaction Piece and unauthorized Termination Statement, Primerock is properly returned to the position it was in prior to the entry of those documents on the public records.”
previously held that a mortgagee was not estopped from enforcing a mortgage even against an innocent purchaser where the mortgagee did nothing to mislead the purchaser and her name had been forged on a power of attorney under which satisfaction was entered on the mortgage. See 67 Pa. 427 (1871). Brown has been cited, along with cases from other jurisdictions, in support of the rule that a wrongfully satisfied mortgage survives notwithstanding the existence of a subsequent bona fide purchaser or mortgagee for value.”
——
“By setting aside the forged Satisfaction Piece and unauthorized Termination Statement, Primerock is properly returned to the position it was in prior to the entry of those documents on the public records.”
Folks, it is a fair and legitimate question to pose upon any court, “Even if I tendered or paid my loan off today or in 30-years, who is the lender / creditor, not the ‘servicer’ but actual ‘creditor,’ who will clear my title with a properly recorded satisfaction?” Now I’ve never heard of a Ponzi Scheme that could last forever. No matter how big or small, Ponzi Schemes always and inevitably come crashing down. When this current scheme collapses, it is not far-fetched to imagine millions of beneficiaries / mortgagees over the past 20-years rising up like zombies and staking claims and liens to millions of properties. Remember – under most mortgages and deeds of trust, the borrower / homeowner has a duty to defend TITLE!
Bill Paatalo
Oregon Private Investigator – PSID#49411
Oregon Private Investigator – PSID#49411
BP Investigative Agency, LLC
*TO PLACE AN ORDER FOR A “CHAIN OF TITLE & SECURITIZATION ANALYSIS,” CLICK THE LINK BELOW:*
https://bpia.wufoo.com/forms/chain-of-title-securitization-analysis-a/
Website By: 
Leave a Reply