Tag Archives: corruption

Something interesting this way comes

0Shares

Something interesting this way came on Dec. 17, 2018.

By Doug Boggs         July 3, 2019

 

Some say that there have been minute movements toward a seemingly truer justice found in foreclosure courtrooms that are taking place as of late. Are we seeing glimmers of hope from an otherwise wasteland of inaction by the courts against the myriad of institutional fraud and corruption from not only our judicial system but also the financial and real estate sectors? Can we find optimism and perhaps see a shift moving from corporate authoritarianism to more socially democratic results? Is the corporate socialism paradigm ebbing?

In one of the newer cases that are making some waves in how future foreclosure arguments are going to be constructed is the CA Supreme Court decision in the case of Dr. Leevil, LLC vs. Westlake Health Care Center. This December 17, 2018, decision begins to shed light on the timing and legal clarity of who holds power and standing to foreclose?  This basic foreclosure question in contract law is now being challenged in nearly every foreclosure case with valid evidence to show cause exposing just how corrupt, unlawful and unconscionable the results can be of courts continuing to ignore and gloss over this legal point of fact.

CA Supreme Court decision: Dr. Leevil, LLC vs Westlake Health Care Center

The property owners defaulted on a loan secured by a deed of trust on commercial property. The lender instituted foreclosure proceedings, and Dr. Leevil, LLC purchased the property at a trustee’s sale. The day after it purchased the facility, Dr. Leevil served the tenant Westlake Health Care Center with a three-day notice to quit. Dr. Leevil recorded title to the property five days later. When Westlake failed to vacate, Dr. Leevil sued for unlawful detainer.

If the property is foreclosed, and the tenant in possession does not vacate, which is often the case, the new owner of the property (purchaser at trustee’s sale) will likely want to evict the tenant. That requires service of a 3-day written “notice to quit” upon the tenant, followed by an unlawful detainer (eviction) lawsuit.

Westlake opposed the lawsuit, arguing the notice to quit was invalid because it was served before Dr. Leevil recorded title to the property. The trial court disagreed, finding the notice to quit was valid. Westlake agreed to surrender possession and pay damages. The court of appeal affirmed, holding that Code Civ. Proc. §1161a(b)(3) does not require a new owner to record title prior to serving a notice to quit.

In this case, the Supreme court overturned the Court of Appeal ruling stating:

“We conclude that an owner that acquires title to a property
under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust must perfect
title before serving the three-day written notice to quit required
by Code of Civil Procedure section 1161a(b). Accordingly, the
judgment of the Court of Appeal is reversed.”

The main issue was the timing of the notice and perfect of title. The court concluded that it must precede an unlawful detainer action where the action is not brought by a landlord but by a new owner who has acquired title to the property under a power of sale contained in a deed of trust. Dr. Leevil filed the 3 Day Notice, as a necessary code compliance action to follow in the beginning process of a power of sale clause. He filed this the first day after purchasing the property at a Trustee Sale, yet five days before he filed to perfect his title.

In a unanimous decision, the California Supreme Court overturned the Court of Appeal, ruling the purchaser at a foreclosure sale, in this case, Dr. Leevil, must perfect his title and be the legal owner following recordation of a trustee’s deed, then serve the 3-day notice of eviction. The Supreme Court held that perfection of title, which includes recording the trustee’s deed, is necessary before the new owner serves a three-day written notice to quit on the possessor of the property. This means that there must be the proper filings and legal postings of the court prior to an unlawful detainer action. The Court thus reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which had concluded that perfection of title need only precede the filing of the unlawful detainer action and that the new owner may serve the notice to quit immediately after acquiring ownership.

I feel that an arguable defense that one can take from this ruling might be that the foreclosing party to a foreclosure sale must be able to prove that their ability to foreclose.  This ruling should show a more stringent find for standing before a party can begin the foreclosure proceedings in a power of sale clause.  The possible prima facia evidence of this is only merely assumed in a non-judicial foreclosure proceeding.  This is due to the fact that there is no independent party between the lender and the borrower to keep this type of thing from getting out of hand.  Despite that, the CA Supreme Court ruled in 1978 that this is to be the case.  There is no independent trustee in a deed of trust, and there has not been since Jan.1, 1998.  Thus, creating the fabrication of documents and filing forged or fraudulent paperwork.  The same levity to the perfected title must be applied to a foreclosure case as to an unlawful detainer as the same depth of damages could occur. This could have some very large implications in the cases to come.

With the millions of cases of fraud, forgery, robosigning or other means of fabrication of documents that have been uncovered, and continue to be largely ignored by the courts, there might be some light at the end of the proverbial rabbit hole, or rather a tunnel.  Perhaps we are finally whittling away at the necessity by the courts to actually follow the rules of contract law.

Through more definitive case law such as this, we will now begin to see arguments to further refine that definition and how it might change the foreclosure process. If it is now a precedent that the perfection of the title is required to file an unlawful detainer action, will it now be an argument that perfection of the title is to be required before the property can be auctioned at a Trustee sale through the power of sale clause? if so, this ruling could have major implications in the foreclosure litigation world.

As a nationally certified Bloomberg Forensic Loan Securitization Auditor, I have found fraud in every single client’s documents.  Whether it is through an audit completed by a third party which I reviewed and analyzed or one that my office completed.  The results of illegalities, improprieties, fraud and/or forgery are quite staggering.  Despite this, courts across the country still to this day rarely rule for the foreclosing party the need to present the original title prior to the ability to foreclose.  The courts are fully aware that the deeds of trust and mortgage notes have been shredded making the contract void.

I am hopeful that this case will bring a breath of fresh air to the arguments of standing and the need to further support this claim in the future.   

* * * * * * * * * *

I welcome those reading my blog. 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.

 

©2014-2019 Doug Boggs All Rights Reserved

 

0Shares

Right in front of our eyes

1Shares

We are somewhere within a twilight zone where bankers receive a “get out of jail free” card by paying their way out of jail through countless settlements for the biggest financial heist of our generation. Every week we hear of another financial institution caught in another fraud scheme heading for the courtrooms. The government has turned a blind eye to the homeowners and middle America for well over a decade now for justice on the fraudulent foreclosure front. The spread of wealth over the past decade to the top 1% percent is unparalleled. Today, we have more than 850,000 government employees that are forced to work for no pay during this current government shutdown. The effects of which we are now seeing with mortgage payments being missed.

Although seemingly rare, there are times when it seems that the government is attempting to help middle America. It was back in 2004 when the FBI announced to the public of an upcoming “epidemic of mortgage fraud.” However, we found that the government did nothing to investigate or stop it. Instead, we watched the empires on Wall Street being given bailout packages in the hundreds of billions of dollars. To top off this further deregulation was instilled and the Mortgage Backed Securities were renamed, repackaged and it was same as the old. Did we as a society learn anything from the economic breakdown of 2008?

You know, the blessing of hindsight is 20/20. The FBI, to my knowledge, has never been known to the public to be experts in mortgages, especially the tangled web of mortgage backed securities (MBS’s) and collateralized debt obligations (CDO’s) that Wall Street was doing. The government did nothing to investigate or stop it, left the world and the masses in their systemic complacency. I don’t think too many people at that time really thought that the entire global economy was going to collapse.

I became aware of the mortgage fraud being perpetrated against us when we began receiving the Notice of Default and Intent to Foreclose at the end of December, 2010. We began to dig deeper and understand fraud and the foreclosure process. In early April 2011, we filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank for Fraud and Breach of Contract. We had been current on our mortgage payment until November 2010. It was then that the modification counselor advised us to stop paying the mortgage and we would be in a more favorable position for modification. We did what was advised and in November stopped paying, and then were once again denied the modification. At the end of December the foreclosure process began.

By the end of 2008, I experienced the collapse of my construction and real estate development companies in TX and CA. The economic issues were certainly not local. Then, with being two years unemployed, I had a lot of time on my hands and we couldn’t afford an attorney. I had heard about a couple in Florida that got foreclosed on, even though they had paid cash for their home decades before. I’d heard similar cases in other states – homeowners being foreclosed while being current on their mortgage, foreclosed by the wrong banks, etc. The question wasn’t about WHY a party was being foreclosed on, but became a question of HOW a party gets foreclosed on.

I learned very early of the corruption of the system. When I saw, beginning with the very first documents, fraudulent paperwork was being filed in order for Wells Fargo Bank to expedite a foreclosure against our property, I knew then that the courts and the Country Recorder’s Office were failing in their positions to our society.

As I stated, as soon as we began receiving foreclosure notices we stopped the process by filing our lawsuit in April 2011. This put a halt to their attempts to foreclose. However, they claimed that they were going to auction off our home every month. Sometimes as often as [every] few weeks, they would have our property on the list. I went to the courthouse steps each time and showed all of the prospective bidders, should the property be auctioned off, that there was an encumbrance – the lawsuit placed against the property. This proactive process helped us stop the sale of our home for about a year. Then, finally, despite our legal action in Federal court against Wells Fargo Bank, I watched our home be auctioned off to a professional foreclosure acquisition firm. We then fought this party in Unlawful Detainer court while we were fighting Wells Fargo in Federal court, as well. Things were quite hectic at that point.

All of this corruption, fraud, pressure and stress due to the foreclosure, and all of the legal work that needed to be done, began taking its toll on our health and our marriage. It directly affected our relationship, as we felt that we were basically in a fight for survival. More and more arguments were happening because of the stress load. We tried hard to fix things between us, but doing that and fighting against the Wells Fargo beast was near impossible. We were able to maintain a working friendship in order to accomplish our legal battle, but the marriage dissolved into divorce during the lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank. Family might hold empathy to things in the foreclosure process, but unless you are actually in that battle, it is difficult for other family and friends to fully grasp the levity of what is going on behind closed doors. But, as best as they could, family was interested and supportive to what we were involved with.

The biggest obstacle for me during this time was my own inner strength to continually tell myself that I could do this. I had to learn that lawyers didn’t know everything and that they lie, cheat and steal. I understand that power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. As we got higher and higher up the chain of power, we found that corruption became the norm and not the exception. We had to learn the basics of law, but also to learn and act as a lawyer in the courtroom. It was definitely a crash course in law. I liken it to condensing three years of law school in about six months. And during that time of learning we were in a constant state of survival using the tools that we were learning. Meditation helped me maintain my sanity.

One might ask “Why would someone put themselves through such a tribulation? Why didn’t we simply let it go and try to put the pieces of life back together again?”

What pushed me was that Wells Fargo Bank illegally stole my home. Its much like you are walking down the street with your life savings in a duffle bag and someone, named Wells Fargo, comes running by and steals it. Do you run after them down the street yelling and screaming? Of course! But the courts don’t want to listen to what you have to say. Despite all of the evidence of fraud, breach, perjury and more, they get away without any penalty. It just blows my mind. The courts don’t seem to care.

I don’t want anyone else to have to endure what we went through. The courts are ignorant, complicit, or silent to the claims against the banks. I have since become a nationally certified Forensic Mortgage Loan Auditor. I have found fraud and void loans in 100% of all of the loans that I have audited throughout the nation. In other words, every foreclosure case that I have worked on there is a 100% chance that the bank foreclosing on any property does not have the right to do so, and also I have found that the bank who is collecting the monthly mortgages doesn’t have the right to do that either.

I want the truth to be known that no one is safe from a foreclosure. Whether you paid cash for your property and never even used a bank or if you are current on your payments. The courts allow anyone at any time to be foreclosed on. Hard to fathom, but it’s very real, and very true. If it has not happened to you, good, and most people think that it won’t or can’t, and maintain a level of complacency. I am looking for solutions to the greater problem at large and not simply on the micro scale of my own life.

This is where my book and documentary, A Quantum of Justice, came from. I wanted to shed some light on a part of the legal system that is not being addressed by any court, state Attorney General, or anyone on the federal levels of government. The recitation for all of the fraud has gone to the financial institutions that are conducting the fraud in the first place. It all can make someone lose faith in our system.

As soon as we began receiving our foreclosure notices in the end of December 2010, I felt lost and beaten. The world was collapsing around me and the pressure was thick and difficult to be in. As soon as we began receiving our first foreclosure documents, the very first thing I said to my wife was that if we were going to lose our home, then I wanted to get an RV and head out to make a film about the destruction of the American dream. At the time, the desire to get in an RV and make a film was really a measure of a desire to escape. But the idea maintained itself throughout the last four years of the legal battles that have taken us through California State Superior, Appeal, Supreme and Federal courts.

It has taken some time, but that vision is happening right now. I have been renovating an RV to do just that. The film follows through our foreclosure process. It delves deep into the fraud of foreclosures and the illegalities of the Securitization of Notes. It sheds light on how one can begin and take on a legal action acting as their own attorney. It clearly explains how the banks know they are defrauding you by examining the rule of law and the wording of the contract. It shows how in most cases the banks do not have the right to foreclose. In fact, in most cases, by law no one holds the right to foreclose. The paperwork to legally foreclose actually does not exist, but the courts allow the banks to foreclose anyway. This makes the states complicit in the fraud of the foreclosure.

We go into depth of the securitization process of Notes and how the banks sell off mortgages that are then placed into mortgage backed securities on Wall Street – yet these banks then collect for the mortgage that they don’t own, month after month, year after year. It exposes some of the corruption within the judicial system. We learn from senators, congresspersons, judges, lawyers, ex-mortgage brokers, bankers and more of their views and opinions of their knowledge of the system and the corruption. Knowledge is power.

I have put together a trailer for the film “Quantum of Justice”.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdmoHGCrH48  My intention for this film is to expose the full depth of the corruption of Wall Street and the story of the common man rebuilding and redefining what the American dream is today.

After all we have learned over the passed decade I still ask myself “Why is there not a bigger outcry from the masses?” Lately we have seen some light being shed on this enormous fraud, and still there are no big protests demanding criminal prosecutions and accountability. I wonder what can be done to change this? I continually ask myself what can I and others do to change it?

In the words of Ghandi: “Be the change you wish to see in the world!” It isn’t over yet. Since 2008, we have watched Wall Street create new securitized investment funds using our savings accounts, retirement portfolios and pension funds, student loans, car loans, and more, just as they were doing with securitized notes that were placed in MBO’s and CDO’s. Hang on!

When something comes to your front door and into your home and affects your life in a very direct way, this is when most people wake up. Life is busy enough. But when it really hits and affects one’s life, then they begin to act against it. Through my firsthand experience of the fraudulent foreclosure system and its inner workings, and bearing direct witness to the corruption of the judicial system, and because of the depth of the research during my lawsuit and further research to make this film, I approach the information from a perspective that I have yet to see exposed in any film. Change happens. What we do with it is what will orchestrate the next phase of our lives.

The steps that I took were filing a lawsuit. That is certainly not for everyone to do. I hope that people get more interested, open up constructive dialogue, become involved, and write letters to their Congresspersons and Senators. Change happens with or without you. If it happens without you, you become a product of it. If it happens with you, you can help guide it to become the change you are looking for.

By Doug Boggs with Senka Huskic
originally posted https://www.occupy.com/article/quantum-justice-doug-boggs-foreclosure-crisis-and-truth-right-front-our-eyes#sthash.DgV1SsBt.H2x2A6P6.dpbs

* * * * * * * * * *

I welcome those reading my blog. 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

©2014-2019 Doug Boggs All Rights Reserved

1Shares

Why the judge silenced my court documents

5Shares

I want to be clear as to why the judge acting in my legal case silenced my court documents.  I want people to learn why the judge lied to me when he told me at the end of the case that he had copyrighted my court file.  The reasons are simple yet may not be very clear.   It is the same reasons that to this day there is still only a minute amount of my legal case documentation available for public record.  It is the same reasons that the court had conveniently “lost” the files from the court reporter that I had hired to transcribe the case.

To make this point we will go back a little bit to when I filed a lawsuit against Wells Fargo Bank for fraud, in early 2011.  In order to accomplish this task, since I didn’t have money for an attorney I had initially hired a paralegal to assist me in developing the paperwork so that I could file a cause of action and move forward in CA Superior Court.  After only a few moving papers filed the defendants filed a motion to move the case to Federal Court.  This is called Remanding the Case.  It was a strategy on their part.  Since I was acting as my own attorney and was thus far proving to be successful at filing paperwork to the court, counsel for the defense decided to send it up the chain to the federal level.  In the federal court system there are a different set of rules of court and rules of procedure to follow that the defense might be able to get me to stumble upon.

It was after they successfully remanded the case to the Federal Court of Northern California that my paralegal informed me that the case was now out of their league.  They were not familiar with the Federal rules and procedures and therefore felt it would be best for them to not assist me.  The paralegal was sorry for never dealing at the federal level and not knowing the information, but didn’t want to make a mistake on their end that would end my case or cause harm to me from their actions.

I can understand this and we parted amicably, but now I needed to learn everything I could about the rules of court and rules of procedure at the federal level.  This strategy on the defenses part was good because it made me not only have to learn the rules of the game, but at the same time, respond to the moving papers that they began filing.  I found myself in the law library and online nearly every waking hour of the day just trying to keep up.  So, I spent the next year and a half arguing about the fact that they never served or never appropriately by law served me documents when they would file a motion or moving paper.  they tried to get it to where I would not respond timely or show to a hearing because I would not have known the date or time.  We never even got to argue or litigate any substantive issues.

You see, over 90 percent of any and all court cases are won and loss due to simple procedural errors done by one of the parties.  These procedural errors are part of the rules of court or the procedures of the court as outlined by each state.  If a law firm doesn’t follow the rules as to how one is supposed to file a document, or how to fill out specific documents, or to show up to court on time, or to file specific documents on time, or to serve opposing parties, and a myriad of other rules that must be followed, the firm can lose the lawsuit by dismissal or demurrer based on not following the rules or law or procedure.   The law firm would then probably not tell their client the real reason that they lost and will probably inform the client of some other convoluted reason as to their loss, but it certainly wouldn’t be because of a procedural issue that the firm failed to do.  So, this means that if you simply learn and do the paperwork correctly, if you learn and do all of the filing correctly and make sure of all of the timing issues and get them done correctly, you will have an over 90% chance of winning.

So, I concentrated on this point alone and played that card as I learned the rules of the game.  So, if there were procedural issues from the opposing counsel that I could argue against (and there always was) I would.  This way I would not have to go down the road of arguing any legal points that they would bring up.  The law office for Wells Fargo Bank- Anglin, Flewelling, Rasmussen, Campbell & Trytten, LLP; and the law firm for the NDEX West, LLC acting as the Trustee- Barrett, Daffin, Frappier, Treder & Weiss, LLP wanted to get me into arguing the legal issues.  This was their arena.  This is what they know.  This is how they win by staying with what they know.

So, I am not a lawyer.  I do not have a subscription to Lexus-Nexus that I could easily shepardize legal precedents, appeals decisions and more at the flick of a keystroke.  My legal research was done in the UC Berkeley Law library, Hastings Law Library, or the San Francisco Law Library pouring over hundreds of volumes of legal tomes and familiarizing myself with legal cases for hours and days on end in order to try to wrap my mind around each case that the opposing counsel would throw out in their documents.  The referenced cases numbered in the hundreds and there was no way I would be able to stay with them and follow and argue appropriately if I stayed in their arena.

So, I would argue that the procedures to the paperwork were done incorrectly by them.  They did not file documents correctly, they did not serve the documents correctly, or they did not serve the documents at all.  This was where I could make a case, however, the court did not want to rule against or dismiss the case for the bank under procedural issues which would land someone with a home that is free and clear or can no longer be foreclosed upon.  The court wanted to stay away from this, so the court would never end the litigation.  It was frustrating to see how the courts would not follow the rules of their own court siding with the banks continually allowing them multiple “bits of the apple”.  However, during this time I was able to learn more and more about law, rules and how to litigate.  I was simply buying time.

I researched, memorized and learned more and more.  I reviewed my case notes from every angle and idea that would arise.  This time spent staying in the legal arena was tiring and frustrating to do and not really get into any substantive legal issues pertaining to my case, but it allowed me to find ways to learn.

So, over time I submitted Amended Claims and whittled away at honing my arguments.  I learned and found ways to file amended causes of action against Wells Fargo Bank for fraud.  This alone was difficult, as fraud is one of the most difficult causes of action to argue.  The nights were sleepless and the days were filled with research.  It was wearing me down.

I began to get much more focused in my argument against Wells Fargo when I was tasked by my study friend to find a Deed of Trust that actually abides by all facets of the existing rule of law.  Because I was unable to find a true Deed of Trust in how it was worded or signed, in order to substantiate my case to the court for what a true Deed of Trust document looks like as it based on the rule of law, I found myself in front of the computer system at the Alamed County Recorder’s Office for days on end, reviewing thousands and thousands of documents.  Eventually I found one that fit the parameters of what I was looking for that took me back to a contract dated 1997.

That was when I sat down an wondered why I had to go all of the way back to 1997 to find a Deed of Trust Agreement that fits the parameters as set out by the rule of law.  What took place that created this timeline of contracts where none of them actually comply with real estate contract law?  How can this be?

None of these contracts complied with contract law because they weren’t signed by the lending party, or if there was a Substituted Trustee the documents used to make this substitution we never signed by the borrower.  However, in 1997, I found a handful of contracts which both parties signed and any changes or substitutions were signed by all parties, and I found Re-Conveyance documents that were also filled out appropriately to the rule of law.

This action is simple and dates back to the Statute of Frauds (1677).  This is still valid law and on the books throughout the United States.  What this law states is that in any real estate contract it must be done in writing.  It also must be signed by all parties to the agreement.  This law also goes into the fact that if there are any changes to the contract agreement, any and all of the changes must be signed by all parties of the agreement.  This is the only way to make sure that the contract has a meeting of the minds throughout the duration of the agreement.

So, why was there such a lengthy timeframe where these contracts were not signed by both parties, or if there was a substitution of a trustee that this document was never signed by the borrower?  What was it in 1998 that happened that changed how these contracts seemed to be being used?

I looked deeper into changes in the laws regarding borrowing, lending and the power of sale in the state of CA.  I scoured through scores and scores of pages of legalese that made my head spin trying to find any change that I might put to reference that would explain why this might be the case.  I read and re read civil code 2924, et al, that dealt with foreclosure in California.  This is the code which dictates the power of sale clause in a deed of trust agreement in the state of CA.

I wanted more information, but I still needed to focus on the lawsuit.  I now knew that I had a true Deed of Trust Agreement as it is outlined in the rule of law.  I also knew that I had a true Substitute Trustee document as it is to be written according to the rule of law.  I also knew that I had found a true Re-Conveyance document as it is to be written according to the rule of law.  I could now used these documents in the courtroom as evidence to compare my documents with these others that exemplify by the rule of law as to what these documents are supposed to look like.

I noticed at that time that the CA Civil Code 2934a stated that a bank was able to name a new trustee.  It stated that the new substituted trustee would take on and possess all of the rights and actions deemed the previous trustee in a deed of trust agreement.  This got me thinking that if a bank could name a new trustee how did that relate to the independence of the trustee in a deed of trust?  So, a bank can “name” a new trustee, I find no issue with this.  However, substituting a trustee without the consent or signature by the borrower defies the Statute of Frauds.  It also means that if a bank has the right to substitute a trustee, and the previous trustee has no means of refusal of this substitution, then this simply means that the trustee holds no power against the will of the lending institution.  A new trustee could be substituted if the original or presiding trustee was no abiding by the actions of the bank.

So, if a trustee was calling to task some of the actions that a bank needed to address in a foreclosure action, and the bank was not addressing legitimate tasks regulated for them to do in a foreclosure action, the bank could substitute the trustee holding the bank to task and replace them with a substitute trustee that will allow the bank to act in whatever way it suits the bank and to file whatever document necessary to file stating that the bank has complied with all of the rules when in fact they did not.  Due to the fact that the bank might not have complied with the rules according to the power of sale, but the substituted trustee files the documents and asserts to the court that they did in fact comply and are acting in accordance to the rules the bank could foreclose on anyone, at any time, for any reason or no reason at all because there would no longer be a party entrusted by the state, namely the trustee, that will be tasked with oversight against the bank.  The oversight cannot be enforced by the trustee.  Because if they did try to enforce true oversight against the bank acting under the power of sale, if the trustee was not acting in the interests of the bank, the bank could substitute them with another party who would act in the way the bank wanted.  The bank would then be able to file any document, against any borrower, or against any property at any time.

This seemed out of line with the rule of law.  First, as per the Statute of Frauds any and all parties involved in the real estate contract must sign on all documents to the contract and all changes to any document to the contract throughout the life of the contract agreement.  Second, the CA Supreme Court rule in 1978 that the trustee is to be a third and independent party in a deed of trust agreement.  The trustee is to be at arms length from all parties involved in order to hold no bias to either party in the agreement.  It was the trustee who was to make sure that both parties acted in compliance with the rule of the contract.  It was the trustee who was tasked to protect the borrower’s title from any wrongdoing from the bank, and to protect the rights of the bank to be able to foreclose if the borrower failed to pay.  If either party did not act in accordance to the rules of the contract, including the power of sale clause, the trustee had the power to stop the foreclosure and make the bank act in compliance to the rules of the power of sale.  Third, if the trustee holds no power of oversight against the lender in a deed of trust agreement and they can be replaced at will by the lender in the agreement with another trustee who will act on behalf of the bank this means that there is absolutely no protections held for the borrower or the borrower’s title in a deed of trust.

This means that there is no true trustee and the trustee is a strawman acting on behalf of the banks.  This means that the banks know that they can manipulate the trustee to act on their behalf and know that the borrower has no protections to their title.  This means that everything that the deed of trust agreement stands for is moot.  This means that unless the banks inform the borrowers of this information which would make every borrower change their mind to whether or not they would sign a deed of trust agreement, prior to signing of the deed of trust agreement, this constitutes and act of fraud.  The fact that the banks are privy to knowledge about the trustee and the deed of trust that the borrowers are not privy to when the borrower signs the deed of trust agreement then there is not a meeting of the minds, that there is a misrepresentation of facts regarding the contract and therefore the contract is VOID.  if the contract is void the borrower is under no obligation to pay the lender for the money borrowed.  If the contract is void, there is no legal way a bank can foreclose against a borrower using the power of sale clause in the contract because there is no contract.  This means that a bank is unable to foreclose against a borrower if the bank used a deed of trust agreement to secure the money lent to the borrower.  This means that a bank holds no right to foreclose and the borrower holds the right of title free and clear.  If is as if the contract were 13 sheets of blank paper there would be just as much legal reference to the contract as it stands.  The banks participate in this misrepresentation of facts in every deed of trust document throughout the state of CA since 1998.  Let this sink in.

After I submitted this information in my fourth amended complaint and the defense attempted to argue various points of law in order to demurrer the complaint that I chose not to argue or respond to any of their legal points or case law that they were spewing out.  Because none of it was relevant.  I responded by stating that they must first prove that they have a true and legitimate contract to begin with.  They must first prove that they have and are in possession of a true and legitimate deed of trust contract as outline by the rule of law.  I was now holding them to task to prove that the deed of trust was legitimate as to the rules of law in the state of CA.  They must show the court that the trustee holds an independent position in the deed of trust agreement.  They must show the court that the trustee would be able to hold the banks accountable for wrongdoing against a borrower’s title without recourse against them by the banks if the banks were to chose to do so.  They must show that all parties have signed off on all documents and changes to the deed of trust agreement throughout the duration of the contract.

The defense was unable to do so.  The court was now in the unenviable position to side with a homeowner who has proven to the court how all of the deeds of trust in the state of CA since 1998 are based on VOID paperwork.

After this information was presented in the courtroom and there was no response available from the defense the judge looked at me and smiled and said, “Mr. Boggs, I know exactly what you are trying to state now.  I understand your argument and see where you are going with this.  Since we have nothing else from the defense,” he stated, “that I will have to take this under consideration in my chambers.”  Note that when he said this the courtroom was filled with other people from other cases and other witnesses that were listening quite intently.  So, by his “taking into consideration” meant that he would not rule in the courtroom so that all of the people would hear his response or decision.

So, he dismissed the case and took the documents out from public view and access.  This was how he silence my court documents.  The reason why he silenced the court documents should be clear at this point.  His decision that Wells Fargo Bank issued a fraudulent contract based on the fact that there is no legitimate trustee participating in the contract and that the bank failed to represent this fact to me prior to the signing of the contract makes the contract void means that all other deed of trust agreements in the state of CA could now file an actionable defense against the lender in the other contracts therefore negating every deed of trust in the state of CA dating back to 1998.  This also means that all of the money spent on all of the contracts by law should be returned to the borrowers who were lent money under the bank’s deceptive practices and misrepresentation of facts.  This means that the entire non-judicial foreclosure system is a fraud and broken.  This means that all foreclosures in CA must immediately be stopped and reviewed.  He also knew that there are 36 deed of trust states in the United States to which all of them have similar rules allowing similar practices across the nation.  This would have set a precedent that would have had a domino effect that would have collapsed Wall Street much more than what took place in 2008.  This not only would have set up a precedent that would have negated all deed of trust contracts in 36 states, but this would have also negated every mortgage backed security that used any of these mortgage agreements that these deeds of trust were held with that had been traded since 1998.

I think you can now understand why the judge silenced my court documents.

This is our judicial system.  There won’t be a ruling on truth, but only a ruling that works in the best interest of keeping the flow of capitalism as we have come to know it.  Despite the fraud, despite the corruption, despite any truth.

 

 

* * * * * * * * * *

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

5Shares