Tag Archives: CA Civ Code 2934a

Hypocricy

0Shares

hy·poc·ri·sy –  həˈpäkrəsē/ – noun
1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does to conform; pretense.

synonyms: dissimulation, false virtue, cant, posturing, affectation, speciousness, empty talk, insincerity, falseness, deceit, dishonesty, mendacity, pretense, duplicity;

More antonyms: sincerity
Origin – Middle English: from Old French ypocrisie, via ecclesiastical Latin, from Greek hupokrisis ‘acting of a theatrical part,’ from hupokrinesthai ‘play a part, pretend,’ from hupo ‘under’ + krinein ‘decide, judge.’

How can we dig ourselves out of such a hypocritical system?  We live in a financial world where we use words like Trust, Trustee, Deed of Trust.  In 35 of our 50 states, someone who is borrowing money to purchase a home is given a Deed of Trust contract agreement by a financial institution.  In this system, through my own personal lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank for fraud, I uncovered that through revisions that were done to Ca Civil Code 2934a, in 1998, a financial institution is well aware of the fact that a Trustee in a Deed of Trust contract holds no protections for the borrower and the borrower’s title.  The financial institution is well aware that the Trustee is a straw man, and that the bank is able to control and manipulate the borrower’s title the moment the borrower signs the paperwork.  The banks are well aware of this, yet, fail to inform the borrower of this fact, therefore, deceiving the borrower into a false contract agreement making this entire contract void on its face.

We live in a confused hypocritical world where our leaders are filled with empty talk, dishonesty, insincerity, posturing and deceit.  Where their duplicitous nature seems to be the norm.  Where one stands up against drugs and touts the continued need for the failed ‘war on drugs’ only later to be found with cocaine and marijuana after being stopped in a routine traffic violation.  Where another married, white, maleCongressman who stands firm against LGBT or minority rights, is only later to be found shagging an African-American transvestite in the congressional bathroom.

The people in the United States live in a perceived ‘democratic’ society.  But, our own previous President, Jimmy Carter, has called it an Oligarchy.  This oligarchical system where we have our armed forces, at the bequest of American corporations, travel all over the world overturning democratically elected officials of other countries, overthrowing those politicians in order to install a more politically American friendly despot. Of course, all of this is done in the facade of spreading democracy around the world in order for American companies to have a more strategically powerful capitalistic stronghold over another country’s own labor, oil or mineral reserves.

Americans live in a system where we are taught that our vote can make a difference.  Yes, the original ideals of our system of government are the idea of one person one vote, however, history shows us that through the gerrymandering and redistricting of voting boundaries, our one person one vote is shut out to a specifically calculated populace that will create a delegate who will vote, as in many cases found,  for whichever political party that they are paid to do so.

Our ‘democratic’ system is continuously passing new and more refined voting laws that have shut out the elderly, the minorities, the sick and frail to fend for themselves.  These new laws create so much confusion that when people show up to cast their vote, they show their government supplied ID or drivers license, but then they are told that they cannot vote because they do not have the proper new identification that is necessary due to some new rules that was instituted.  Or, that people in these new redistricted areas find that they have less voting centers and must travel many miles to cast their vote, as well as, wait in line for hours on end in order to do so.  I guess it is up to us to find the time to stand in line, as seen recently in Arizona, 6 hours to vote, allthewhile, needing to work 60 hours a week just to keep food on the table.  Fit that into your schedule.  Our government knows that creating a national holiday can be dangerous, because that would make more people have the opportunity to vote.

I think we are all well aware of the fact that our political system is rigged and filled with fraud and corruption.  We know that there are some voting machines that are reporgrammed and tampered with, that change a vote from one party to another, or one candidate to another once the vote is cast, but we can only hope that all of the machines aren’t re-programmed in this way.

We all live in a world where politicians lie in order to acquire the trust of the people who are tasked to vote for them.  Where the Supreme Court has allowed politicians the levity to lie and make it okay to do so in the political arena.  Yet, we are asked to vote for the politician who has the best interest of the public in mind.

We live in a country where the Constitution states that one person is one vote.  We live in a country where a corporation is considered a person.  Albeit, a person who has more rights that another person.  Our Supreme Court ruled in 1818, in the decision of the Trustees of Dartmouth College v. Woodward(17 U.S. 518 (1819)), writing: “The opinion of the Court, after mature deliberation, is that this corporate charter is a contract, the obligation of which cannot be impaired without violating the Constitution of the United States. This opinion appears to us to be equally supported by reason, and by the former decisions of this Court.” Beginning with this opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court has continuously recognized corporations as having the same rights as natural persons to contract and to enforce contracts.

Seven years after the Dartmouth College opinion, the Supreme Court decided Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts v. Town of Pawlet (1823), in which an English corporation dedicated to missionary work, with land in the U.S., sought to protect its rights to the land under colonial-era grants against an effort by the state of Vermont(the home of Bernie Sanders) to revoke the grants. Justice Joseph Story, writing for the court, explicitly extended the same protections to corporate-owned property as it would have to property owned by natural persons. Seven years later, Chief Justice Marshall stated: “The great object of an incorporation is to bestow the character and properties of individuality on a collective and changing body of men.”

Since the Supreme Court’s ruling in the right winged Koch Brother’s private organization called, Citizens United, things have changed dramatically.  Through the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, the United States Supreme Court upheld the rights of corporations to make political expenditures under the First Amendment. Since, there have been several calls for a U.S. Constitutional amendment to abolish Corporate Personhood.  While the Citizens United majority opinion makes no reference to corporate personhood or the Fourteenth Amendment, Justice Stevens’ dissent claims that the majority opinion relies on an incorrect treatment of corporations’ First Amendment rights as identical to those of individuals.  Riiiiiiight…

We live in a system where that one person is allowed a maximum political contribution of $2700, yet, due to the ruling of Citizen’s United, corporations are allowed to give unlimited amounts to any specific candidate.  Perfect way to keep an oligarchy running.

As you may have been these last few days, people rush to complete their tax filings.  Yet, it is well documented and public knowledge, which most people seem to refuse to acknowledge or believe, that the income tax system of the United States was never ratified by all of the states and because of that fact that there is absolutely NO law that requires any person in the country to pay their hard earned money to the IRS.  Many people cannot wrap their head around the fact that our tax system is designed around a private corporation, called The Internal Revenue Service.  This private company is tasked to extort and collect money from the citizens of the United States in order to pay another private corporation called The Federal Reserve.

We must have the courage to take deeper look into the hypocrisy of our society and what we as a society are going to do change our systems to allow us to live in a more sincere civilization.  It is our responsibility to create the world we wish to live in.  We cannot ask those hypocritical leaders to create a sincere civilization.  In the words of Mark Twain, “If voting made any difference they wouldn’t let us do it.”

 

* * * * * * * * * *

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.

©copyright 2014-2016 Doug Boggs

0Shares

CA Civ Code 2934(a) and why EVERY Deed of Trust agreement is void!

27Shares

The state of CA is a Deed of Trust state.  Which means there is a note and a deed of trust agreement attached with a real estate contract agreement.  The state courts use a non-judicial foreclosure process in which to administer a foreclosure procedure.  The idea of a non-judicial foreclosure process is that it gives the judicial power over to the trustee to administer the foreclosure through the rules of CA Civ Code 2924, which is known as the Power of Sale clause in a deed of trust agreement.  In a non-judicial foreclosure process there is a presumption of correctness that is given to the trustee by the court as it is the job of the trustee to act in the best interests of the court.  It was stated by the CA Supreme Court that the trustee be at arms length and independent of both parties to the agreement in order to create fairness.  It is the job of the trustee to protect the Title from any wrongdoing of either party during the life of the contract agreement.

The fact that the trustee holds no power to protect the borrower from any wrongdoing from the bank in a foreclosure process means that the idea of the trustee and a deed of trust are corrupted as the trustee is a strawman.

Read thoroughly through CA Civ code 2934a.  This code was changed in 1998.   Herein, we will look at the rules as they are written to be effective after January 1, 1998.  I urge you to take a look to a side by side review of the code as it was written prior to January 1, 1998.

In its changes it takes away the powers of the trustee. It gives the power of the trustee, to protect the Trustor’s title from the beneficiary, back to the beneficiary. Which means that the beneficiary is in control of protecting the Trustor’s title and not the trustee, as it is assumed and outlined in the Power of Sale clause, or Ca Civ Code 2924, of a Deed of Trust contract agreement in the state of CA.

The bank knows this, yet, gives the borrower a deed of trust agreement to sign without informing the borrower that the details in the deed of trust are false which make the Power of Sale clause invalid.  The bank does not inform the borrower that the borrower has no protections to their title as soon as they sign the agreement, and that the bank is able to do whatever it wishes to the borrower’s title whenever they wish to do it. This is fraud by the misrepresentation of a material fact.

Because the banks know this information and neglect to inform the borrower of this important detail, that the trustee to a deed of trust contract is a strawman, then there is not a meeting of the minds to the contract agreement. The contract was constructed by the bank against the borrower without the borrower having all of the same information as the bank, as per the rules of the contract. Due to there not being a meeting of the minds to the contract prior to the signing of the contract, and that the rules of the contract are deceptive in nature and benefit one party over the other to the benefit of the bank constructing the contract, this is fraud by the misrepresentation of a material fact.

This also goes against the rules of the CA Supreme Court as per the independence of the trustee necessary in order to protect the interest of both parties involved in a deed of trust.

Through the rules that dictate contract law, and through the Statute of Frauds(1677), it is given that any and all changes in any real estate contract must be done in writing and signed by all parties involved in the contract.  There must be a meeting of the minds of the rules governing the contract or the contract is to be deemed void.

There are currently 35 states in the United States that use a Deed of Trust agreement.  There is legislation in nearly all of the other states to conform to a deed of trust and non-judicial foreclosure process.  There are similar rules in all states that allow this to take place.

 

CA Civil Code 2934a

2934(a)(1) “…a trustee may be substituted by the recording in the county in which the property is located of a substitution executed and acknowledged by: (A) all of the beneficiaries under the trust deed, or their successors in interest…”

This states that the beneficiary is allowed to name a trustee to be substituted, and acknowledge that they have done so and file that in the county recorder’s office.

It is also the job of the trustee to be independent in nature and arms length from either party to the transaction, as per a CA Supreme Court ruling, in order to make sure that all of the rules of the Power of Sale clause are to be followed by both parties in order to protect the interests of either party as to their relationship with the Title. Therefore, if there are any changes to the deed of trust contract it is the obligation of the trustee to make sure that all of the rules are correctly followed and the documents are correct in their information.

this means that the beneficiary is in full control of the trustor’s title, the Power of Sale process, and that the trustee is indeed a strawman.

2934a(4)(b) “If the substitution is executed, but not recorded, prior to or concurrently with the recording of the notice of default, the beneficiary, or beneficiaries, or their authorized agents shall cause notice of the substitution to be mailed prior to or concurrently with the recording thereof…”

As it is the job of the trustee to make sure that all of the rules of the Power of Sale are followed by either party in order to protect the interest of either party in the transaction, the question then lies, “how could the substitution take place and be ececuted without the knowledge of the trustee, or the signing off by the trustor?”

this means that the beneficiary is in full control of the trustor’s title, the Power of Sale process, and that the trustee is indeed a strawman.

2934a(4)(c) “If the substitution is effected after a notice of default has been recorded but prior to the recording of the notice of sale, the beneficiary or beneficiaries or their authorized agents shall cause a copy of the substitution to be mailed…”

this means that the beneficiary is in full control of the trustor’s title, the Power of Sale process, and that the trustee is indeed a strawman.

2934a(4)(d) “…the substitution of trustee shall be deemed to be authorized to act as the trustee under the mortgage or deed of trust for all purposes from the date the substitution is executed by the mortgage, beneficiaries, or by their agents. Nothing herein requires that a trustee under a recorded substitution must accept the substitution…”

this means that the beneficiary is in full control of the trustor’s title, the Power of Sale process, and that the trustee is indeed a strawman.

NOTICE: I am not an attorney and am not herein offering any legal advice. This is form informational purposes only. For legal advice please consult your own attorney.

 

* * * * * * * * * *

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

©2014-2018 Doug Boggs All Rights Reserved

27Shares