From an online discussion group
____
 | me (Joseph Zernik, Human Rights Alert (NGO) change)
Stramge theoretical legal discussion, out of touch with reality...
What I find strange and misleading about the discussion under this title, is that all parties involved write as if the US has a functional court system today. In fact, numerous expert reports have documented the routine Fraud on the Court by judges and banking attorneys in foreclosure cases. See for example the case of Lomas v Bank of America, which I documented in detail, where LA Superior Court Peter Meeka conducted proceedings, which he secretly noted as "off the record" proceedings all along... Susan Lomas could have had the strongest case and the most able attorneys, it would not have made any difference. I also documented 2 US judges (in California) and 2 California judges (including Peter Meeka in the case of Susan Lomas), who refused to file a statement on the record (pursuant to the California Code of Judicial Ethics), regarding financial benefits to them or family members residing with them from Bank of America. Bribing of state and US judges by Bank of America must be a serious concern. LINKS: [1] 12-06-08 Courts and Judges as racketeering enterprises under RICO (the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) - key element in the current financial crisis http://www.scribd.com/doc/96504009/ [2] Bribing of state and US judges by Bank of America must be serious concern. ... http://www.scribd.com/doc/52846502/ [1] 11-03-20 PRESS RELEASE Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) Bank of America Continues Racketeering in the Los Angeles Superior Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/51160102/ [2] 11-03-20 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) in the Superior Court of California County of Los Angeles online “Case Summary” and Minutes http://www.scribd.com/doc/51157264/ [3] 11-04-05 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) in the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles – Fraud on the Court in a Quiet Title Action http://www.scribd.com/doc/52336989/ [4] 11-04-06 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) “Request[s] for Judicial Notice”- Additional Evidence of Fraud on the Court in Foreclosure Procedure s http://www.scribd.com/doc/52420585/ [5] 11-04-07 Press Release: Lomas v BofA (KC059379) – Judge Meeka is Requested to Restore Due Process, Declare Any Benefits from BofA http://www.scribd.com/doc/52494342/ [6] 11-04-08 PRESS RELEASE: Complaint filed against California Judge Peter Meeka, Clerk of the Court John A Clarke, Bank of America and its President Brian Moynihan, and Attorney Mark Asdourian – for Public Corruption and Racketeering http://www.scribd.com/doc/52602364/ [7] 11-04-08 US Attorney Office and FBI Complaint against California Judge Peter Meeka, Clerk John Clarke, BofA and its President Brian Moynihan - Public Corruption and Racketeering in Lomas V Bank of America (KC059379) http://www.scribd.com/doc/52601871/ [8] 11-03-31 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) Request and Response for Certification of Authority as Attorney of Record s http://www.scribd.com/doc/52516705/ [9] 11-04-07 Request for Help by Sandor Samuels, President of Bet Tzedek - "The House of Justice"- in Re Lomas v Bank of America (KCD59379)-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/52521210/ [10] 11-04-07 PRESS RELEASE: Bet Tzedek – “The House of Justice” – President Sandor Samuels is asked to help in stopping fraud by Bank of America against a homeowner in the Los Angeles Superior Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/52525314/ [11] 11-04-08 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379): Ex Parte Applications for Due Process and for a Statement by California Judge Peter J Meeka Regarding Financial Benefits to Him by Bank of America http://www.scribd.com/doc/52844251/ [12] 11-04-12 PRESS RELEASE: Bribing of State and US Judges by Bank of America Must be a Serious Concern! http://www.scribd.com/doc/52846502/ http://www.scribd.com/doc/52846502/ [13] 11-04-12 Lomas v BofA (KC059379) Brian Moynihan and General Counsel of BofA are asked to disclose Attorney of Record http://www.scribd.com/doc/52914197/ [14] 11-04-13 Press Release: Lomas v BofA - BofA, Brian Moynihan Are Asked to Name Their Attorney of Record in the Los Angeles Superior Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/52921960/ [15] 11-04-14 PRESS RELEASE: Harvard Law Professor Yochai Benkler has been asked to review the evidence of large-scale computer fraud in the courts http://www.scribd.com/doc/52993968/ [16] 11-04-14 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) Plaintiff Susan Lomas’s Disqualification for a Cause of Judge Peter J Meeka http://www.scribd.com/doc/53044411/ [17] 11-04-08 Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) 2nd “Minutes” for the Ex Parte Applications for Due Process and Statement by California Judge Peter J Meeka RE: Financial Benefits to Him by Bank of America http://www.scribd.com/doc/53046565/ [18] 11-04-15 Press Release: Lomas v Bank of America (KC059379) - Lomas files for disqualification of Judge Meeka, calls “quits” to charades in the Los Angeles Superior Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/53071727/ [ii] 11-04-17 Lomas v Bank of America - Additional False Notations in the Online "Case Summary" http://www.scribd.com/doc/53209167/ [iii] [1] 10-10-15 Proposed Organizational Chart of the LA-JR (alleged Los Angeles Judiciary Racket) http://www.scribd.com/doc/39383792/ [2] 11-01-07 Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California: Widespread Public Corruption and Refusal of US Department of Justice to Take Action http://www.scribd.com/doc/46460640/ [iv] 10-04-19 Human Rights Alert (NG0) submission to the United Nations Human Rights Council for the 2010 Review (UPR) of Human Rights in the United States as incorporated into the UPR staff report, with reference to "corruption of the courts and the legal profession". http://www.scribd.com/doc/38566837/ [v] 11-04-07 Request for Help by Sandor Samuels, President of Bet Tzedek - "The House of Justice"- in Re Lomas v Bank of America (KCD59379)-s http://www.scribd.com/doc/52521210/ 11-04-07 PRESS RELEASE: Bet Tzedek – “The House of Justice” – President Sandor Samuels is asked to help in stopping fraud by Bank of America against a homeowner in the Los Angeles Superior Court http://www.scribd.com/doc/52525314/ _____
You don't understand my point, Wolf, and frankly few "expert" foreclosure defense lawyers get it either. They bilk their feckless clients out of $10k or $20k or more to stall the inevitable auction of the house, but the client always loses the house. Statistically ALWAYS. Why? Courts are bound to enforce the contract the borrower signed promising to give up the house for defaulting on the loan. That's the whole idea of a mortgage in connection with a gargantuan loan. Lender can take the mortgaged collateral in event of default. This is so seriously important that a bunch of states like California, Texas, Georgia, etc, don't even require the owner of beneficial interest in the note to litigate the foreclosure. And in California, the borrower has to TENDER PAYMENT before suing for quiet title. Ergo, IT IS STUPID TO FIGHT A FORECLOSURE. It is NOT stupid, however, to hire a competent mortgage examiner to look for causes of action underlying the mortgage - torts, breaches, errors, and use them as a hammer to negotiate a settlement or sue. When the borrower has causes of action and attacks the lender on the basis of those grievances, the borrower statistically ALWAYS WINS. Choice 1 - fight the foreclosure and always lose. Choice 2 - fight the mortgage and always win. Which seems least stupid to you? ____
I don't know where you got this from Robert: "In other words, it is quite stupid for the slaves to try to defend against foreclosure of their defaulted loans because they always lose." The fact is that so begin revolutions, extremely bloody revolutions. The true fact is that this point in time reverses stupidity: It is utterly stupid to foreclose on slaves, because that leaves them nothing left to lose, except their chains of bondage. Wolf |
No comments:
Post a Comment