8/3/2019 It's All About the Money, Stupid

1/2

8/3/2019 It's All About the Money, Stupid

2/2

But let us be clear. There are only two ways you can get out of a debt: (1) payment and (2) waiver. There

isn't any other way so stop imagining that some forgery in the documents is going to give you the house. It

won't. Butif you can show payment or waiver or both, then you have a material issue of fact that completely

or at least partially depletes the presumption of the Judge that you simply don't want to pay a legitimate

debt from a loan you now regret.

Why are the terms of the securitization documentation important?

1. Because it was the investor who came up with the money and it was the borrower who took it. Themoney transaction was between the investors and the homeowners, with everyone else an

intermediary or conduit.

2. It is ONLY the securitization documents that provide power or authority for the servicer or trustee toact as servicer or trustee of the mortgage backed security pool.

3. If the deal was between the investor who put up the money and the homeowner who took it, where arethe documents between the investor and the homeowner? They can only exist if we connect the

closing documents with the homeowner with the closing documents with the investor.

4. But if the transfer or assignment documents were defective, faulty, forged and fabricated, as well asfraudulent attempts to transfer bad loans into pools that investors said they would only accept good

loans, then the there is nothing in the REMIC, there is no trust, there is no trustee of the pool and the

servicer has authority to service nothing.

5. That breaks the connection between the so-called closing documents with the homeowner and the so-called closing documents with the investor. No connection means no nexus. No nexus means the

investors have a claim arising from the fact that they loaned money but they don't get the benefit of a

secured loan and they especially don't get anything unless THEY make the claim.

6. If the investors choose not to make the claim for collection or foreclosure, there is nothing anywhere inany law that allows an interloper to insert himself into the process and say that if the investor doesn't

want it, I'll take it.

7. Your position should address the reality: appraisal fraud, deceptive lending practices, violations ofTILA all contributed to the acceptance of a faulty loan product. But that isn't why your client doesn't

owe the money. Your client does owe the money, but it has been paid to the creditor and the balance

has been waived in the insurance and credit default swap contracts as well as the the Federal bailouts.

8. The source of funding has been paid in whole or in part, they received the monthly payments evenwhile they declared a default against your client homeowner, and they waived any right to pursue the

rest from homeowners because they wish to avoid the exposure to defenses and affirmative defenses

that the homeowner will bring in the mortgage origination process.9. The failure to identify the true creditor contrary to the requirements of law and the failure to describe in

the note and mortgage the full terms of the loans creates a fatal defect when applied to THIS case on

its facts, which you will be able to prove if you are allowed to proceed in discovery.

Allowing interlopers into the process to pretend as though they were the mortgage lenders or successorsleaves the homeowner with nobody to sue for offset, and no defenses to raise against a party who hadnothing to do with either the investor or the homeowner in the closing with the investor wherein mortgagebonds were purchased, and the closing with the homeowner in which a portion of the funds collected wereused to fund a loan to the homeowner.