Major Fiat Banks In Panic Mode?

Major Fiat Banks In Panic Mode?

The Rumor Mill News Reading Room 

Major Fiat Banks In Panic Mode?

Posted By: Lion [Send E-Mail]
Date: Tuesday, 13-Mar-2012 04:17:08

----------------- Don't know if this is only JP Morgan Chase, or not but the scenario must affect all the big fiat fraud centers... Recently Chase sent out thousands of 'guaranteed' 2nd day delivery by the USPS notices, costing $11 each to mail, in an 'urgent offer' for the homeowner to refinance with Chase at a lower interest rate - up to a full percentage point lower. Granted, overall interests rates are lower on fiat fraud finance, but the urgency of the notices seemed at odds with the banks ongoing policy of raping the consumer for all they can steal. Chase stated the re-fi had to be completed by March 31st. "Just sign the AUTHORIZATION form and return - no hassle re-finance at a lower rate - guaranteed acceptance - get more money for what you need - and lower interest rate that will give you a lower monthly payment and more freedom to CHOOSE WHERE YOUR MONEY GOES...." Hmmm....Why would Chase put that carrot out front?? This is unusual behavior for Chase bank. Banks just don't willingly give away potential billions in profit, especially when they already have paying consumers locked into a mortgage at the current rate. Something IS up. It appears even CHASE may be in PANIC MODE. Why would this be? ------------------ [ MERS National Data Base ] Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. (MERS) is an American privately held company that operates an electronic registry designed to track servicing rights and ownership of mortgage loans in the United States. MERS is owned by holding company MERSCORP, Inc. The real estate law and real estate transactions in the US are subject to state regulations and county level filing requirements, since the time of the establishment of the US as an independent country. This is because every time a financial instrument containing mortgages is sold, various state laws may require that the sale of each such mortgage (or deed of trust) be recorded in the local county courts; "in order to preserve certain rights (e.g., the right to foreclose non-judicially), which triggers an obligation to pay corresponding recording fees." [If those “certain rights” are not preserved how can an alleged holder in due course prove that he has a right to collect any money or foreclose on a property?  Also all non-judicial foreclosures are a denial of due process and therefore are unconstitutional.  IMO Sooner or later all of them will have to be reversed, the property returned or the people compensated for damages.] [EXAMPLE ARIZONA - ARS 33-411. Invalidity of unrecorded instrument as to bona fide purchaser; acknowledgment required for proper recording; recording of instruments acknowledged in another state; exception A. No instrument affecting real property gives notice of its contents to subsequent purchasers or encumbrance holders for valuable consideration without notice, unless recorded as provided by law in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the property is located. B. An instrument shall not be deemed lawfully recorded unless it has been previously acknowledged in the manner prescribed in this chapter except in the case of master mortgages as provided in section 33-415. C. For purposes of this section, an instrument affecting real property containing any defect, omission or informality in the certificate of acknowledgment and which has been recorded for longer than one year in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the property is located shall be deemed to have been lawfully recorded on and after the date of its recording. D. An instrument affecting real property in this state executed, acknowledged and certified in any other state in accordance with the laws of that state, shall be valid and entitled to record as if executed in accordance with the laws of this state. [Even if recorded in another state that recording is still required to be recorded “in the office of the county recorder of the county in which the property is located.” Or it becomes an invalid transfer of interests that cannot lawfully be collected or foreclosed upon.  But “they” are doing it every day and getting by with it.] E. Letters patent from the United States or any grant from the government, executed and authenticated pursuant to law, may be recorded without further acknowledgment. ] The financial industry, eager to trade in mortgage-backed securities, needed to find a way around these filing requirements, and this is how MERS was born to replace public filing with a private one. [TO CIRCUMVENT LOCAL RECORDING REQUIREMENTS AND FEES is cheating and some AG’s have sued for damages.] By 2007, MERS registered some two-thirds of all the home loans in the US. Two-Thirds. The company is the owner of record (or the owner's nominee) of the security interest arising from mortgages extended by lenders, investors and their loan-debt servicers and recorded in county land records. By using MERS, the lenders and investors who are the real parties in interest - "avoid the need to file assignments in county land records, which lowers costs for lenders and, they claim, for consumers, by reducing county recording fee expenses resulting from real estate transfers and provides a central source of information and tracking for mortgage loans." [THEREBY CHEATING AND DEFRAUDING LOCAL RECORDERS OUT OF THE LEGISLATIVELY REQUIRED FEES AND CONCOMITANTLY INVALIDATING THE TRANSFERS.  If a transfer is INVALID how can it be lawful for the successor  holding an INVALID interest to be a Real Party in Interest to foreclose? SEE EXAMPLE ARS 33-411. Further, MERS is often only a NOMINEE Beneficiary and has successfully claimed in court that they have NO BENEFICIAL INTEREST in the property and therefore have no tax liability.  Then other courts ruled that NO BENEFICIAL INTEREST means that they have nothing to transfer to anyone else.  Therefore, should not those successor entities left holding an empty bag sue MERS for damages instead of foreclosing on the homeowner?] The company's role in facilitating mortgage trading was relatively uncontroversial in its early days a decade ago, but continued fallout from the subprime mortgage crisis has put MERS at the center of several legal challenges disputing the company's right to initiate foreclosures. Should these challenges succeed, the US banking industry could face a renewed need for capitalization.  [Should not the federal reserve fractional banking system be replaced?] Recent court cases where THE UPHELD LAW states "the only VALID mortgage is between the ORIGINAL (buyer) and the ORIGINAL mortgage holder (FINANCE COMPANY)".  [See the comments about “preserving rights”] Most mortgages on the books have made their way into possession of the largest major banks, in the form of bundled securities, derivatives and credit default swaps. Most of these mortgages were NOT originally written by the banks who now service the debt (collect the money).  [And in the process of bundling each mortgage was insured at full value multiple times by AIG and other like insurance companies.  How many times was one mortgage paid in full by these multiple insurances?  How many times were these toxic assets paid in full by TARP FUNDS and BAILOUTS?] Most mortgages are now in the national MERS computer data base, and have no original document, provable-in-a-court-of-law paper trail. [Check out Counterfeiting laws – “a copy of a note/negotiable instrument used in commerce is a counterfeit.”] Hence the recent rash of 'robo-signers' where banks are fraudulently, and frantically 'producing so-called original documents' - unknown even to the homeowner whose name appears to be 'signed' on the 'new original' mortgage debt agreement, even if the homeowner never saw the document, and never agreed to sign anything. Robo-signing is complete fraud and a felony by law, punishable by a prison term. See:                                       [Does not fraud cancel all contracts?] 2010 United States foreclosure crisis http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreclosure_crisis If the home owner elects to re-finance however, the re-finance debt agreement then becomes a 'new original mortgage'... ------------------ Source: Yes http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/homeowners-rebellion-could-62-million-homes-be-foreclosure-proof Homeowners’ Rebellion: Could 62 Million Homes Be Foreclosure-Proof? The financial juggling that helped cause the 2008 crisis may be coming back to haunt banks—and help homeowners. by Ellen Brown posted Aug 18, 2010 Over 62 million mortgages are now held in the name of MERS, an electronic recording system devised by and for the convenience of the mortgage industry. A California bankruptcy court, following landmark cases in other jurisdictions, recently held that this electronic shortcut makes it impossible for banks to establish their ownership of property titles—and therefore to foreclose on mortgaged properties. The logical result could be 62 million homes that are foreclosure-proof. http://www.yesmagazine.org/new-economy/homeowners-rebellion-could-62-million-homes-be-foreclosure-proof ------------------ Fractional Reserve Banking: "Lend money that doesn't exist and add a rate of interest on the money that doesn't exist onto the total assignment of debt, thereby collecting in return multiple times the amount of the original debt assignment and then claim ten times the amount of assigned debt being serviced as assets to the banking firm who assigned the debt, or the banking firm currently servicing the debt." [How is this accomplished?  In ‘Modern Money Mechanics’, a publication of the Chicago Federal Reserve, it is explained that the bank cannot loan other depositors money because that would block those funds until the “borrower” repays them.  They cannot loan you the bank’s money without violating the reserve requirements.                         So Who funds the “loan”?  A Transaction Deposit Account is opened in the name of the “borrower” and the Note that he signed is deposited.  Then a check is written from that account that makes the balance “zero” so that the TDA goes away.  That check is handed to the “borrower” and is called a “loan”; the books are raised on both sides of the ledger and the “loan” becomes a deposit in the overall Federal Reserve System.  Then 90% can be loaned to another; and 90% of 90%, etc. until 8 to ten “borrowers” are paying interest on “money” that never existed and never will.  At best it could be that the “money” was created on the sweat equity labor value of the original “borrower”.  Is this not ‘unjust enrichment’ for the bank? ·       If you deposit a $100 Federal Reserve Note into a bank it becomes the banks money – but they owe you.  ·       If you deposit a check into that bank it becomes the banks check – but they owe you.  ·       If the bank takes your valuable negotiable instrument –“The NOTE” – and deposits into an account associated with your name without your knowledge or informed permission it becomes the banks “money” – how is it that they figure you owe them?  How are the banks different from the money changers in the Temple that Jesus took a whip to and drove them out?  When will someone drive the present day money changers out of the Temple of Commerce?]