The Trustee is given the presumption of correctnes

The Trustee in a non-judicial foreclosure procedure is given the presumption of correctnes[s] in the performance of their position.  This is what the banks or beneficiaries are well aware of and use to their advantage in a non-judicial foreclosure procedure.  Because, by law as ordered by the CA Supreme Court, the Trustee is ruled to be independent and act on behalf of the court in the transaction and is to be at arms length from either the borrower or the lender, the documents filed by the Trustee are considered to be true and correct.  What exactly is true and correct anymore?  As we move forward through this post I may repeat myself a few times in order to make sure of the reader’s clarity.

You see, the Trustee is given the power of the court and subsequently is given the presumption of correctness.  Meaning that, if there were to be a legal action taken by a borrower against a beneficiary for wrongful foreclosure in a non-judicial foreclosure action, the court will first abide by what the Trustee says to be true and correct because they are acting as the court.  It is now the job of the party being foreclosed on to show the court of the illegalities being made by the beneficiary, rather than the Trustee doing their job to begin with, because the Trustee works for the banks and is a strawman in the transaction acting in the best interest of the bank.

It is the job of the Trustee to be independent and to make sure that the paperwork being filed is done according to the rules and is true and correct as it relates to the necessary actions to be taken in the power of sale.  What this truly means is that the paperwork that is submitted by the beneficiary is to be filled out correctly, however, this does not mean that the contents and actions which are stipulated within the documents have been done correctly and in accordance to the rule of law.  So, therefore, the Trustee oversees that the paperwork might be FILED correctly, however, that does NOT mean that the actions to which the beneficiary is claiming to have done, that have been stipulated within the documents in order to comply with the rules of the power of sale, or the contents of the documents, have been done correctly or if at all.  But, because the Trustee is given the presumption of correctness by the court it is assumed by the Superior court that things have been done according to the rules of the power of sale.

So, what happens when the beneficiary does NOT follow the rules of the power of sale?  According to the court, because the Trustee allowed the paperwork to be filed in the County Recorder’s Office, the Superior and Federal Courts assume that the contents of the documents are true and correct.  Why is this?  Because the Trustee is to be independent of both parties in the contract and is to be without bias to the information one way or the other.  It is because of this assumed independence that the Trustee is given the presumption of correctness in their actions.

The beneficiaries know that they have owned the Trustee and have since 1998.  They know that the Trustee is not independent and that the Trustee works in the best interest of the beneficiary and with no interest to the borrower.  For this reason, the Trustee will file any document that is filled out by the beneficiaries, or any party acting as a beneficiary, even if all of the information in those documents are a lie, false, and fraudulent.

When Wells Fargo came at me with guns blazing and filing their Notice of Default, I noticed that the documents were filled with incorrect information.  See my post Notice of Default.  The contents of the information were incorrect.  The papers that were being filed were being filed in order to deceive the court so that the beneficiary could quickly foreclose without allowing us the opportunity to rectify the situation from our end.

The beneficiary is able to use the accepted public perception, and the rule of law set down by the CA Supreme Court in 1978, which dictates that the Trustee is independent.  In this independence it is the intent that the Trustee act on behalf of the court.  Therefore the paperwork is considered true and correct because of the presumption of correctness that is given to the Trustee no matter what the information in the paperwork seems to state.  This is how someone who is current on their payments can be foreclosed on.  This is how someone who paid cash can be foreclosed on.

The Trustee has worked for the banks and has been since the Senate Bill 1638 was passed as law and became active law on January 1, 1998.  The courts have turned a blind eye on fact that the beneficiary and the Trustee are to be independent.  The courts have incorrectly allowed or acted in a complicit nature to the fact that the banks and the Trustee are able to work together in a fraudulent manner.  The courts have turned a blind eye to the fact that when there are any changes to a real estate contract they must be signed by all parties.  The State has incorrectly allowed or acted in a complicit nature in order to allow the banks to fraudulently use a deed of trust mortgage since the year 1998.

(NOTE: If you have not read my previous posts on this issue you can do so and catch up by clicking How is your deed of trust VOID?)

The judicial system itself sold out to a law that had been in the books since 1677.  In 1998 when CA Civil Code 2934a was amended through Senate Bill 1638, and instilled into law on January 1, 1998, it was reiterated in the new law that all parties must sign to any changes to the contract agreement.  Because the courts have turned a blind eye to the fact that the Trustee is to be independent is the exact reason that the deed of trust agreement is fraudulent and VOID.  Because the courts and the state have turned a blind eye to the fact that all parties must sign any and all changes or substitutions that are done to the deed of trust agreement also show how corrupt things have become.

 

 

* * * * * * * * * *

I welcome those reading my story. I appreciate all of the emails I have been receiving. I also appreciate those who have registered and subscribe to this blog. If you have come from Facebook please comment on this site, rather than any Facebook post of this page due to the fact that there are many readers who are not part of Facebook forums, or even Facebook itself. I encourage all readers to put their comments on this site so that all of the information will be accessible to all readers from all parts of the internet. I urge you to join this site and receive the RSS feed, or bookmarking us, sharing us with your friends on Facebook and Twitter. If you know of anyone who might benefit from this information I urge you to pass on this website address! Share and let’s make some change together!

Thank you for stopping by.

SiteLock

©2014-2017 Doug Boggs All Rights Reserved

2 thoughts on “The Trustee is given the presumption of correctnes

  1. Renoira

    http://foreclosurenation.org/foreclosure-education/is-the-trustee-a-common-agent-for-all-parties-yes-say-the-experts-at-northwest-trustee-services-inc-in-santa-ana-ca-attny-kathy-shakibi/

    “IF the homeowner has gone to court PRIOR to a foreclosure sale THE TENDER rule does not apply when the homeowner is challenging who owns the note and the deed of trust.

    SO, with a viable possibly successful lawsuit pending the CRIMINALS get into a huddle and their ONLY STRATEGY becomes to PUSH THE TRUSTEE SALE through as FAST AS POSSIBLE. Then, the homeowner will have to come up with thousands of dollars after the sale to proceed in their lawsuit.

    See how it works? It is like injuring your opponent in a 300 meter dash who is obviously going to win if you don’t damage him in some way.

    Or, like when the bull fighter’s knowing they can’t beat the bull, first stab the bull many times injuring the bull and making sure the bull fighter can’t loose.”

    Reply
    1. dboggs07 Post author

      I understand your position, although, it holds NO legal bounds to my point. In relation to my point there is no contract. If you argue anything else you bring to life points to a contract which are VOID. You must not argue anything else, as there are no legal bounds to do so. The only argument is that the contract is VOID. Bringing anything else up means that you are giving credence to something that doesn’t exist. This is not about TENDER, or “who has the note?”, or any other argument that would bring life to a dead contract. That is what they want you to do as it would then put you into their arena which they own and win.

      Oh, and of course the “experts” at northwest trustee services would put out bullshit like this. Attny Kathy Shakibi should be ashamed. Based on this I would never hire her.

      In order for a homeowner to win these travesties against justice they must be harmed. This is part of the definition of fraud. So, there are different points to where the harm is. It begins with the monthly payments that go to a company with no right to collect. Which means it is a matter of the court to find out who actually owns the note? Since most notes are destroyed, or fraudulent on their face, the law states that the ownership goes to who can be proven to be owner of last contention. That is the borrower. Thus, every argument is able to contain the necessary contents to argue this, but if one argues this, which by all legal definitions should win. However, the litigant must also show the corruption of the court, which will happen, because without it the banks will always lose on this argument.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.