• Archives

  • Blog Stats

    • 667,738 hits
  • Categories

  • Testimonials

Policy Changes aka eNotes are Here! New Paragraph 11 in Promissory Notes. — Deadly Clear

We’ve discussed UETA and eSign and the significance of explicit consent…in most cases pre-2008…there isn’t any. Here is a Indiana case that is riveting: Good v. Wells Fargo. Read it HERE. In this case, Bryan Good stated that in this 2008 transaction there were apparently 2 notes. Wells Fargo asserts that Good signed an eNote […]

via Policy Changes aka eNotes are Here! New Paragraph 11 in Promissory Notes. — Deadly Clear

 

Advertisements

Jamie Dimon BUSTED Buying Bitcoin! (Bix Weir)

I hope that Bitcoin will not become just another asset to be manipulated by the big mega banks like gold, silver and many other commodities currently are.

Deadly Clear

You can’t make this stuff up!

Just days after Jamie Dimon proclaimed that “Bitcoin is a Fraud!” and he would “Fire any trader that worked for him that bought Bitcoin”…JP Morgan Securities LTD in Europe was the 4th largest buyer of the “Bitcoin Tracker One” ETF!!! Not exactly sure about the legality of this, but I don’t think the CEO of the world’s largest “Too Big Too Fail” bank is legally allowed to participate in market manipulations on what he deems a “fraudulent asset!”

View original post

How JPMorgan Chase Is Cashing In On Private Prisons

Justice League

National Memo:

Chase CEO Jamie Dimon is increasingly vocal in public about his newfound ethical concerns. He made a very public statement distancing himself from President Trump over Trump’s failure to condemn white supremacy in Charlottesville, Virginia. He has also described himself as “pro-immigrant”: an opinion that is hard to square away against his roles as a financier, underwriter and bond-holder of private prison corporations like GEO Group and Core Civic (formerly Corrections Corporation of America). Both corporations oversee Immigrant Detention Centers throughout the U.S., many of which house undocumented migrants.

JPMorgan Chase’s investments in private prisons certainly make economic sense: the private prison industry is worth about $5 billion, and the election of Donald Trump has caused the profits of the sector to balloon further. Almost immediately after Trump’s inauguration, the Department of Justice rescinded the Obama administration’s order to phase out federal private prisons from the criminal justice…

View original post 1 more word

THE TRANSFERRING OF SERVICING RIGHTS TO AVOID REVIEWING COMPLETE MODIFICATION APPLICATION

Livinglies's Weblog

bankcrak

To listen to Patricia Rodriguez discuss the latest foreclosure defense issues please visit the Neil Garfield Show here and here.

By Patricia Rodriguez, Esq.

Nothing in this article is meant to be construed as legal advice; there is no attorney-client relationship that is being created. This is for general education purposes only. 

After years of litigating against alleged lenders, investors, servicers, and foreclosure trustee’s we are starting to see a clear trend of the servicing rights being transferred upon receiving a complete loan modification application. What is an alleged lender – this is usually the party that claims to have funded the original loan or the originator.

The alleged investors are those who claim to have received an ownership interest in the loan through an assignment and endorsements or multiple assignments and endorsements. The foreclosure trustee in non-judicial foreclosure states such as California are entrusted with overseeing the foreclosure…

View original post 649 more words

After the Crash, Big Banks Got Bailouts. Abacus Faced Charges.

This outrageous story is just another example of unequal justice. Instead of going after the huge mega-banks the only bank prosecuted is a small community bank owned by immigrants. The cynical (realistic) side of me believes that the only reason this bank was prosecuted is because the owners did not have enough money to buy immunity from prosecution through huge campaign contributions.

Justice League

It’s a little-known chapter from the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression: In 2009, shortly after the housing market crashed and the markets melted down, the owners of a small community bank in New York City’s Chinatown discovered fraud within their loan department.

The bank’s owners, the Chinese-American Sung family, fired a loan officer — and reported the fraud to their regulators at the federal Office of Thrift Supervision.

But two-and-a-half years later, the bank was accused of mortgage fraud by the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office — making Abacus Federal Savings the only U.S. bank to be prosecuted in relation to the financial collapse and the first bank indicted in New York since 1991.

Why did Abacus face charges, while the biggest banks on Wall Street all avoided prosecution for fraud related to the sale of bad mortgages?

That’s the question at the heart of Abacus: Small Enough to Jail

View original post 78 more words

Equifax waited several months before fixing their security issues

Welp, the saga continues. After about a week’s worth of news damaging the company name, it surfaced this morning that Equifax waited months before finally admitting to having to fix a widely known vulnerability in its security software which enabled hackers to compromise the personal information of as many as 143 million US consumers. “We know that criminals…

via BREAKING: Equifax Waited Months Before Fixing Their Security Issues — considertheconsumer

That is outrageous that Equifax waited several months before they fixed the vulnerability in their security software, and also waited several months before disclosing that they had been hacked.

Consent Judgments Undermine Foundation for Legal Presumptions Used by Banks and Servicers

Livinglies's Weblog

When multiple banks and “servicers” entered into consent judgments to remediate foreclosures based upon false documents, they created an opportunity for foreclosure defense lawyers to show that there is an inherent lack of credibility of both law firms and “servicers” (or those who claim to be servicers) which in turn means that legal presumptions applied to such documentation simply don’t apply.

A ruling from the court that denies application of a legal presumption of authenticity or validity simply means that the the foreclosing party must actually prove the loan of money by some party in the “chain” upon which they rely. It also means that any assignment or endorsement must be proven to be a memorialization of any actual monetary transaction in the real world wherein money was  used to purchase loans.

By its very nature such a ruling is not subject to appeal, because it does not deny due…

View original post 1,713 more words

%d bloggers like this: