Join the Class Action to enjoin "wrongful Foreclosures"

Ok… I’ve seen enough ….About 70% of all foreclosures do not include a declaration under penalty of perjury as required by civil code 2923.5 newly enacted Sept 6,2008. I am forming a class action to enjoin these wrongful foreclosures. Set fourth here is the portion of the pleading and the applicable law.
Invalid Notice of Default
181. There is in existence a certain written instrument which purports to be a Notice of
Default that is in the possession of Defendants, and each of them. (See Exhibit “B”)
182. The written instrument alleged in Paragraph “¬181” was procured as follows:
Defendants cannot prove that the nonjudicial foreclosure which occurred, strictly complied with the tenets of California Civil Code Sections 2923.5 and 2924 in order to maintain an action for possession pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1161. As of September 6, 2008, California Civil Code Section 2923.5 applies to loans made from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2007, and loans secured by residential real property that are for owner-occupied residences. For purposes of Section 2923.5, “owner-occupied” means that the residence is the principal residence of the borrower. Prior to filing a Notice of Default, Section 2923.5 of the California Civil Code provides in pertinent part:
(1) A trustee may not file a notice of default pursuant to Section 2924 until 30 days after contact is made as required by paragraph (2) or 30 days after satisfying the due diligence requirements as described in subdivision (g).
(2) An authorized agent shall contact the borrower in person or by telephone in order to assess the borrower’s financial situation and explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure. During the initial contact, the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall advise the borrower that he or she has the right to request a subsequent meeting and, if requested, the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent shall schedule the meeting to occur within 14 days.
(3) A notice of default filed pursuant to Section 2924 shall include a declaration from the mortgagee, beneficiary, or authorized agent that it has contacted the borrower, tried with due diligence to contact the borrower as required by this section, or the borrower has surrendered the property to the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent.
Invalid Declaration on Notice of Default and/or Notice of Trustee’s Sale
183. The purpose of permitting a declaration under penalty of perjury, in lieu of a sworn statement, is to help ensure that declarations contain a truthful factual representation and are made in good faith. (In re Marriage of Reese & Guy, 73 Cal. App. 4th 1214, 87 Cal. Rptr. 2d 339 (4th Dist. 1999).
183. In addition to California Civil Code §2923.5, California Code of Civil Procedure §2015.5 states:
Whenever, under any law of this state or under any rule, regulation, order or requirement made pursuant to the law of this state, any matter is required or permitted to be supported, evidenced, established, or proved by the sworn statement, declaration, verification, certificate, oath, or affidavit, in writing of the person making the same, such matter may with like force and effect be supported, evidenced, established or proved by the unsworn statement, declaration, verification, or certificate, in writing of such person which recites that is certified or declared by him or her to be true under penalty of perjury, is subscribed by him or her, and (1), if executed within this state, states the date and place of execution; (2) if executed at any place, within or without this state, states the date of execution and that is so certified or declared under the laws of the State of California. The certification or declaration must be in substantially the following form:
(a) If executed within this state:
“I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct”:
_____________________ _______________________
(Date and Place) (Signature)

For our purposes we need not look any farther than the Notice of Default to find the declaration is not signed under penalty of perjury; as mandated by new Civil Code §2923.5(c). (Blum v. Superior Court (Copley Press Inc.) (2006) 141 Cal App 4th 418, 45 Cal. Reptr. 3d 902 ). The Declaration is merely a form declaration with a check box.

No Personal Knowledge of Declarant
According to Giles v. Friendly Finance Co. of Biloxi, Inc., 199 So. 2nd 265 (Miss. 1967), “an affidavit on behalf of a corporation must show that it was made by an authorized officer or agent, and the officer him or herself must swear to the facts.” Furthermore, in Giles v. County Dep’t of Public Welfare of Marion County (Ind.App. 1 Dist.1991) 579 N.E.2d 653, 654-655 states in pertinent part, “a person who verified a pleading to have personal knowledge or reasonable cause to believe the existence of the facts stated therein.” Here, the Declaration for the Notice of Default by the agent does not state if the agent has personal knowledge and how he obtained this knowledge.
The proper function of an affidavit is to state facts, not conclusions, ¹ and affidavits that merely state conclusions rather than facts are insufficient. ² An affidavit must set forth facts and show affirmatively how the affiant obtained personal knowledge of those facts. ³
Here, The Notice of Default does not have the required agent’s personal knowledge of facts and if the Plaintiff borrower was affirmatively contacted in person or by telephone
to assess the Plaintiff’s financial situation and explore options for the Plaintiff to avoid foreclosure. A simple check box next to the “facts” does not suffice.
Furthermore, “it has been said that personal knowledge of facts asserted in an affidavit is not presumed from the mere positive averment of facts, but rather, a court should be shown how the affiant knew or could have known such facts, and, if there is no evidence from which the inference of personal knowledge can be drawn, then it is
¹ Lindley v. Midwest Pulmonary Consultants, P.C., 55 S.W.3d 906 (Mo. Ct. App. W.D. 2001).
² Jaime v. St. Joseph Hosp. Foundation, 853 S.W.2d 604 (Tex. App. Houston 1st Dist. 1993).
³ M.G.M. Grand Hotel, Inc. v. Castro, 8 S.W.3d 403 (Tex. App. Corpus Chrisit 1999).

presumed that from which the inference of personal knowledge can be drawn, then it is presumed that such does not exist.” ¹ The declaration signed by agent does not state anywhere how he knew or could have known if Plaintiff was contacted in person or by telephone to explore different financial options. It is vague and ambiguous if he himself called plaintiff.
This defendant did not adhere to the mandates laid out by congress before a foreclosure can be considered duly perfected. The Notice of Default states, “That by reason thereof, the present beneficiary under such deed of trust, has executed and delivered to said agent, a written Declaration of Default and Demand for same, and has deposited with said agent such Deed of Trust and all documents evidencing obligations secured thereby, and has declared and does hereby declare all sums secured thereby immediately due and payable and has elected and does hereby elect to cause the trust property to be sold to satisfy the obligations secured thereby.” However, Defendants do not have the Deed of Trust, nor do they provide any documents evidencing obligations secured thereby. For the aforementioned reasons, the Notice of Default will be void as a matter of law.

Recording a False Document
184. Furthermore, according to California Penal Code § 115 in pertinent part:
(a) Every person who knowingly procures or offers any false or forged instrument to be filed, registered, or recorded in any public office within this state, which instrument, if genuine, might be filed, registered, or recorded under any law of this state or of the United States, is guilty of a felony.
(b) Each instrument which is procured or offered to be filed, registered, or recorded in violation of subdivision (a) shall constitute a separate violation of this section.
In addition, California Evidence Code § 669 states in pertinent part:
(a) The failure of a person to exercise due care is presumed if:
(1) He violated a statute, ordinance, or regulation of a public entity;

¹ Bova v. Vinciguerra, 139 A.D.2d 797, 526 N.Y. S.2d 671 (3d Dep’t 1988).

Here, as stated above the Declaration of Due Diligence as required by Section 2923.5 of the California Civil Code is missing and/or improper for the Notice of Default. Therefore, Defendants are guilty of a felony for recording the Notice of Default with a false instrument according to California Penal Code §115. Since Defendants have violated a statute, the failure of them to exercise due care will be presumed.
183. The written instrument alleged in Paragraph “¬181” was also procured as follows:
By an invalid sale conducted on the part of Defendants, and each of them, in violation of statutes including, but not limited to: Plaintiff is informed and believes and thereupon alleges that the NOTE was invalid and unenforceable due to the intentional and willful violations including but, not limited to: California Civil Code 2924b etc. et seq., California Civil Code §§§ 2924b(a), 2924b(d), 2924b(e) by failing and/or refusing to mail the Notice of Default within ten business days to Plaintiffs, by failing and/or refusing to post and mail the Notice of Default; by failing and/or refusing to mail Plaintiffs the
Notice of Default within one month pursuant to California Civil Code § 2924b (c (1), (2); by failing and/or refusing to properly set the sale date pursuant to California Civil Code § 2924f(b); by failing and/or refusing to publish the Notice of Sale twenty days prior to the date set for sale pursuant to California Civil Code § 2924f(b); by failing and/or refusing to record the Notice of Sale pursuant to California Civil Code § 2924g(d);
184. Since the enumerated law was effective as of September 06, 2008 the sale of the property at issue is invalid pursuant to California Civil Code Sections 2923.5 and 2924,
and thus the Defendants’ claim of title and allegation thereto is erroneous.
185. Plaintiff alleges that Defendants, and each of them, willfully, wrongfully and without justification, and without privilege conducted an invalid foreclosure sale against the Plaintiff’s SUBJECT PROPERTY, thereby, slandering Plaintiff’s title thereto.
186. Furthermore, The California Foreclosure Prevention Act, states the following:
The California Foreclosure Prevention Action became effective June 15, 2009. This new law delays the non-judicial foreclosure process by requiring an addition 90-day delay (beyond the current three-month period) between recording a notice of default and a notice of stay for certain residential properties. The law applies to:
1. Loans recorded between January 1, 2003 and January 1, 2008, inclusive,
2. The borrower occupies the property as his/her principal residence and occupied it at the time the loan became delinquent;
3. A notice of default has been recorded on the property; and
4. The loan is secured by a first lien on residential property that is located in California.
187. In our case, Plantiff, Dannie S. Mahinay’s property was his principal place of residence and his deed was dated on April 9, 2007. Therefore, the California Foreclosure Prevention Action applies and they should be allowed an additional 90 days (plus the three-month period already) after Notice of Default is recorded.
188. The Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale obtained after the sale is false and causes a doubt to be cast on Plaintiff’s title to the property described above.
189. The aforementioned Instrument directly impairs Plaintiff’s right to possession and ownership of the Subject Property.
190. Furthermore, the aforementioned acts of Defendants, and each of them, were
motivated by oppression, fraud, malice in that Defendants, and each of them, by their respective acts, omissions, nonfeasance, misfeasance and/or malfeasance executed an invalid foreclosure sale of the Plaintiff’s SUBJECT PROPERTY, in order to deny Plaintiff of his rights of possession and ownership, whereupon, the Foreclosure was defective as such the Property must be restored to Plaintiff or Plaintiff is entitled to the value of thereof.

Check the notice of default and if there is no declaration “under penalty of Perjury”
Fax me the notice of default and or the notice of trustees sale if you qualify I will add you to the Class action now forming at no cost to you.

If we join together we can beat the lender and there Billions in predatory loans. Fax the notice to 909-382-9956 include your contact phone and my office will contact upon review of the notices. Again this is a class action now forming there is no charge for the review or to be member of the Class action
Southern California (909)890-9192 in Northern California(925)957-9797


51 Responses to Join the Class Action to enjoin "wrongful Foreclosures"


    Outstanding article, and relates too my case. I will fax documentation in reference to my “covered loan” under SB1137 and California Foreclosure Prevention Act.

  2. angry&not taking it says:

    thank you tim
    for effort , time & actions

  3. Spencer says:

    We need help/advice fast; Trustee Sale to happen on 09/21/09

    Purchased our Woodland Hills, CA home in late 05, stop paying on the first and 2nd in January 09 due to job loss, and to try to get Wells to talk to us in the first place. We have been diligently working to get a modification through Wells Fargo directly (no help), and NACA (no response for months from Wells to NACA on what we thought was our pending modification).

    We have a first and 2nd with Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and Wells Fargo Bank respectively. We recently discovered the 2nd Wells Fargo Bank HELOC has a forgery on it.

    – Is that something that can be exploited to stay in our home even though it seems like the 1st (Wells Home Mortgatge) is who is doing the Trustee Sale?
    – If we hire an attorney do we have a good chance of being able to stay in our home for another 6 months to a year while we try to start over.
    – Anyone know the timeline from the date of trustee sale till we are asked to leave ? I’m hearing everything from 3 days to 2 months.]
    – Is it possible to quickly try to create a short sale scenario to delay?

    Thanks in advance,

    • Lisa Amos says:

      I know my response is over a year later, but what happened to you (same lender) happend to my family. I HATE WELLS FARGO! While our home was sold, and we have since moved on, I feel compelled to continue to fight these out of control lenders. Was just wondering what happened with you.

  4. JUAN DACASIN says:

    Dear Tim,

    I am currently represented by a counsel that specialized in Real Estate Law. He is currently defending us for “Unlawful Detainer Suit”. I applied for a loan modification from Homecoming Finance and was not informed any decision that it was denied. However, under Obama’s plan I qualified. The Department of Corporation in California exempt and approved Homecoming Finance Plan of which I have no knowledge. The lender served me with a “Notice of Default” then served me with “Trusty Sale” to commenced in March 2009. I filed my formal request for loan modification right after Obama signed his plan in March. My home foreclosure sale was postponed numerous times without notice. Then the home was sold August 3, 2009 without having a chance to bid for the property. My estimated value is $190,000 and it was only sold for $87,000. Three days after the sale one of the bidder who is willing to testify informed me that the foreclosure sale was not conducted in accordance with the statute. How do I sign in with your class action suit. And lastly, what are my chances with my current lawsuit against the corporation that bidded and awarded the bid in having me contested his ownership of the property. The bidding that took place was illegal.

  5. DennisVega says:

    Hey, I found your blog while searching on Google your post looks very interesting for me. I will add a backlink and bookmark your site. Keep up the good work!

  6. Tnelson says:

    Your site was extremely interesting, especially since I was searching for thoughts on this subject last Thursday.

  7. Wendy Johannson says:

    I have an attorney and we are going to sue Wachovia for any number of issues.
    They took title (sold my home to themselves) in an unlawful trustees sale.
    No notice was given to me that they were going to take Title and I was represented by a Loan Modification Attorney and they didn’t tell him either.
    This took place in December 08 I am still in my home and in May they came at me with a Notice to Quit and an Unlawful Detainer and I have been fighting (pro se) on the Unlawful Detainer since May. I requested a Jury Trial. I am now expecting the UD to be put aside while my attorney and I go after Wachovia.
    Can I add my name to the Class Action without jeopardizing any of my own law suits?

  8. JM says:

    My NOD does NOT! have it!!! I will join!

  9. Andy Jackson says:

    All mortgages are fraudulent see evidence and lawful attacks you can use at
    and use common law defenses by studing Sovereignty:
    This Lawsuit is excellent become a member, Thank you

  10. Nicholle Cox says:

    I’m helping my parents fight Deutsche, Litton Loans, Quality Loan Service & MERS who have wrongfully foreclosed & we have already requested Jury trial just 3 days ago. That day, I went thru the paperwork and noticed something beyond weird…… My dad’s signature didn’t look right. They forged the Deed of Trust as well as the Adjustable Rate Rider. My mom’s in the hospital & has been since Oct 09 & she’ll be there for a long time still because a massive cardiac arrest that has nearly left her in a vegetative state. Yesterday she amazed us all by trying to move her arms, legs, head but due to the length of inactivity, she has no muscle power to move so it will take long time of physical therapy to recover. In her place I’m taking over & having my dad sign any necessary docs because our home has been in his family since 1967. Its the home he grew up in. They only owe 100,000 or so, so we can’t just give up & walk away. We desperately need help & would love to join your class action suit. I’ll be faxing all the info this weekend.

  11. Robert Kincheloe says:

    I am a victim of forclosure fraud with Chase Mortgage & Freddy Mac.
    I got behind in my payments, made a forbearance agreement, made agreed payments. I am in NY now, left CA back in March of 09 to work, to keep up payments. There’s alot more to this matter and will state at a later date. I am looking for help. Please reply. Thank you.

  12. Ron Moss says:

    We have been introduced to predatory lending. Fraud with my application being altered and MERS ordered foreclosed and house sold to “innocent buyer” HSBC Manipulated by FDIC whose authority is questionable Is there a class action adainst IndyMac, MortgageIT or others?

  13. I have a law suit pending and a pending Appeal from a wrongful eviction. I first confronted a lawyer which quoted me a price of over $15,000.00. I miss calendar the date and my case was dismissed. I am filing a Motion to Reconsider on Monday for my failure to prosecute my civil case. Meanwhile my second Complaint was just answered by One West Bank aka Indymac Federal FSB which by the way filed a invailed foreclosure on my home. NDEX West LLC was also involved in the fraud. I am currentally Pro-per in my cases and just starting to feel pressure of the system . Its a tough baddle, but i will not stop till I have my home back.


  14. Pingback: links I like | recall city council

  15. Barbara says:

    Would you be able to contact me. I have a copy of my default and it does not have a declaration attached. Please send me the fax # so that I may become part of your class action.

    Thank you,


  16. Barbara says:




  17. Mawarku says:

    Do I need to get a TILA loan audit prior to filling the lawsuit? MERS is on the document and Bank of America is the servicning company. I don’t have a clue on the PSA – securitization pooling and I believe the loans were predatory loans on Fast and Easy with 20% cash down payment. Marker values depreciate over 50% and will continue to drop. None of the new government program works for us.

    Thank you for educating us to figth for our rights and homes.

  18. Melinda Wiman says:

    What about when the statement is included but they checked the box saying that it was not owner occupied when it was, hence perjuring themselves?

  19. JM says:

    Mine wasn’t even recorded with the NOD. They left it out and filed it later. And they didn’t have assignment under 2932.5 either.

  20. Sue Grisham says:

    I live in Wi I never got a notice of foreclosing the bank just foreclosed on me. They gave me a construction loan after house was done they renewed the loan for they told me 1 year which I found out later it was 7 months collateralized everything than foreclosed on me in 7 months found out when I got served the papers. Lied on my credit report so I couldn’t get out from underneath them. I lost everything. I never was late on a payment!

  21. Nikki says:


  22. danny says:

    class actions suits are unlikely to go anywhere, especially on the “under penalty of perjury” issue. The courts have already ruled that class actions are not allowed, and that “under penalty of perjury” is not required under this law.
    June 7, 2010
    A California Court of Appeals rendered a decision in one of a rash of law suits filed against lenders and loan processors under Civil Code section 2923.5, which was codified by SB1137 in 2008. SB1137 was enacted in response to the significant rise in residential mortgage foreclosures due to the financial crisis. The primary purpose of the statute was to require mortgagees, trustees, beneficiaries, or their authorized agents (hereafter, “lenders”) to explore alternatives to foreclosure with their borrowers before filing a notice of default. The primary mechanism established was the requirement by the lender to wait 30 days after contacting the borrower (or 30 days after satisfying specified due diligence requirements) before filing the NOD. Among other things, the lender is required to contact borrowers, assess their financial situation, and explore alternatives to foreclosure. In addition, the lender must include with the NOD a declaration that it has complied with the contact requirements or that the borrower has surrendered the property.

    The borrowers in this case, who seek to act on behalf of a class of similar plaintiffs, sued Aurora Loan Services to prevent foreclosure on the grounds that it did not comply with Section 2923.5. In particular, the borrowers alleged that Aurora failed to describe specifically how it attempted to contact them (Aurora used generic language indicating compliance with Section 2923.5) and failed to certify that the declaration was made under penalty of perjury. The trial court granted a motion for a preliminary injunction based on the allegation that Aurora did not contact the borrowers as required (the facts are in dispute), but later ruled that the suit was preempted by federal law (Aurora is a subsidiary of a federal savings association), and that plaintiffs were required to tender the full amount of the deficiency as a prerequisite to bringing an action under Section 2923.5.

    CBA filed an amicus curiae brief on behalf of Aurora on the issues of private right of action, specificity of specificity, and the alleged penalty of perjury requirement. Last week, the Appellate Court rendered its decision. The following is a summary of that decision.

    the Court did hold that an action may not be brought under Section 2923.5 as a class action because the question of the adequacy of the attempted or actual contacts is fact-specific. That is, they differ from one member of the class to the next. Thus, it would be nearly impossible to determine whether a lender complied with the contact requirement in any specific instance without an examination of individual claims separately. This is an important holding, as it removes much of the incentives and leverage that plaintiffs attorneys need in order to bring these suits.

    The Court also agreed with CBA that the statement is not required to be prepared under penalty of perjury. If the Legislature intended that, it could have stated it explicitly, as it has in other statutes, such as Section 2941.7(b) (declaration supporting a statutory reconveyance when mortgagee cannot be located). As the statute is silent on the subject, the Court found no reason to infer a requirement.

  23. JM says:

    I have read this as well. In fact, the statute states that failure to contact borrower and/or supply declaration is not grounds to void action/sale.

    I think, especially in California, it would be most effective to pursue the 2932.5 issue regarding beneficiaries and power of sale. That statute is VERY clear, power belongs only to one whose assignment is recorded. We need victories in that area, especially since California is a “no NOTE” state.

  24. NG says:

    It is not that California is a “no NOTE” State, it that the note is unimportant in a non-judicial foreclosure. This can be attacked by a pre-foreclosure action in a TILA rescission action. One TILA action that people do not check for is if the Broker did not send W-2 or tax information for the Creditor to verify before lending money. Remember, the lender must do due diligence that the debtor can afford to pay back the note. If the broker only gave a stated income with no proof, this is a TILA violation and you can do a Rescission on your note. The Creditor must pay back everything you gave them and release the security, then the debtor is required to give back the note amount. Question is, are they really the creditor and from there, a declaratory action is prescribed. Chances are, they are not.

    If your home is foreclosed upon, then you can do an unlawful foreclosure proceeding for all the issues above plus attack the issue of standing to collect on the note.

    • brenton says:

      TO: NG My question pertains to California Real Estate Law.
      how would one find out, if the broker sent to the creditor, your W-2 or Tax info?
      also, if the “Note” is not able to be produced by the lender or “Note Holder” does that mean the homeowner is off the hook for the mortgage due?

      We have lost 5 of 10 homes due to illegal foreclosure and predatory lending.
      Does anyone know a “Competent and Honest” Real Estate Attorney that can take on our cases against the lenders for this?

  25. Melissa Crawford says:

    We live in Kingman Arizona and are going through this whole “chase” and “freddy mac” situation….. Someone please e-mail me with info on how to go about doing something about asap, we just got a forceable detainer and have to be out next week….. Chase still says they are working with us to “modify” our loan…. So does Freddy Mac….. Yeah, something isn’t rite…..
    thank you very much

    Melissa L Crawford

  26. DEBBIE10 says:


  27. Stella says:

    How can I join this class action?

  28. John Jacobson says:

    Would like to joim in suit.My loan was with Downey Savings,now serviced by U S Bank

  29. Lisa D says:

    How can I join this class action and please can someone contact me I am going through this as we speak and my payments are being made. This is so stressful.

  30. Collene Collins says:

    Does this apply to MA residents? Who do I go to for the new Project Economy which states that if you can prove that the bank is guilty of filing ficticious and false documents in the foreclosure process it can be reversed? I need an ethical person whos voice will be heard to expose our case. I guarentee it is one of the worst you have ever seen. HELP

  31. Pamela Edwards says:

    Iam in Washington ST. Would love to join a class action suit.I’m with GMAC they seem to be having problems with me requesting to see my Title and Deed cause the one they sent me in my foreclosure paperwork doesn’t have thier name on it.So I requested a sit down with my lender on title and they told me my lender was no longer in business.I said well that really sucks to be you; you better come up with something.It seems like even though my loan has been sold alot of times nobody has reconvey ed the documentation as the last time this was done according to our county assesers office was Feb. 15 2006.If anybody could send me a response or how to contact a lawyer in my area with this area of expertise I would really appreciate it.Pam

  32. Rick F says:

    I would like to sign on to a Class action suit against countrywide/boa here in Florida.

    Our house was snatched out from under us during an alleged modification attempt, without our even knowing it.

    Any references to an existing Florida suit that we could join that you might have knowledge of would be appreciated.

    • M.S. says:


      Our firm is in the process of investigation for the commencement of a class suit against several banks for mortgage foreclsoure fraud in Florida. Feel free to call me at (813)289-0700 or email me at We are located in Tampa. We look forward to speaking with you.

  33. Elyse Del Francia-Goodwin says:

    They are investigating the foreclosures as the “crime” it is…

    Get your documents in order and bring it to the FEDs…they are all over it!

    TRY everything…

    Just wanted to share,

  34. E M says:

    My mortgage was transferred from Ameriquest to HSBC in 2004. When I got my foreclosure notice, the first set listed MERS as the “lender” of my mortgage. I filed C.13. Received a modification thru the courts three months later. Sent in two payments, both returned. Looking at papers, there was two different amounts listed. Received another foreclosure notice from courts. Tried to work with HSBC and they came up with a new amount that was on a smidge below my original loan. At that point, I was pretty much ready to give up. Found a place to live. Never went to court. A few days later, I received a card letting me know that the case was dismissed w/o prejudice because of no possession of original note. This was in August.

    When I re-examined my MERS paperwork, I saw that they did not transfer “ownership” to HSBC until right before the new set of foreclosure papers was produced. Why? Is this legal?

    Also, is there a statute of limitations as far as how long the bank has to try to produce the note?

  35. Collene Collins says:

    Tim can you please let me know what MA code is for this same situation. I live in MA but the bank was in Maryland. We are victims of an illegal foreclosure our house was bought by a subsidiary of the bank. We were blindsided because we never received any notice of sale nor was it advertised in the newspaper according to chapter 244 section 14. They also paid almost $13,000 more than the listed principal and they were the only ones who had knowledge. I heard that extra money should go to us. We never even had the essential components of the loan because we did not receive our copies of the note and all closing documents therefor we did not have a completion of a legal instrument. Over $150,000 was made in payment in 5 yrs and zero was applied to the principal. How can I get in touch with you because there is so much more to tell. Thank you so much for this outlet

  36. Fighting in Seattle says:

    We have an amended complaint that we are completing against our alleged holder of our note.

    We have a Notice of Default dated 8 days before any assignment and appointment was made for the parties listed in the NOD. Does this render the NOD invalid based on this? I think it means that MERS was the “beneficiary” holding the deed (though not on the NOD) and a title company was the trustee (not the one who has been hired to serve us all of the documents like NOD and NOS).

    I am interested in your thoughts and any knowledge of Washington State laws or Federal statutes that support the invalid NOD.

    • JM says:

      Your NOD is likely invalid. Check WA state statutes. In CA it’s invalid, but judges are sanctioning fraud here and allowing it. We are in process of appealing in part on this basis. Recommend getting help from experienced, knowledgeable attorney in your state now.

  37. Elyse Del Francia-Goodwin says:

    I had mentioned in a previous post to gather all the documents you can and take them to the FBI….I said “they were all over it”….well, they are NOT!! I am so sick of the run around.
    * I filed a Complaint to the OCC, twice! Nothing…
    * I filed a Complaint with the Calif. Attorney
    General! Nothing….
    * I complained to Senator BOXER and
    * I wrote to the White House…Nothing!
    * I filed my lawsuit February 2010 and still
    fighting pro se…
    * The Judge consolidated my Complaint and the Banks Unlawful Detainer, however, Ordered me to pay back payments and continue paying my mortgage to the UD attorney for the banks, even after they wrongfully foreclosed and wrote off the debt via a 1099C and 1099 A.
    * Heading back to court Dec. 15, 2010 in Indio, Ca. to ask the Judge to “halt future payments and return the $16,000 I have paid since filing in February and to order the return of my home (still living in it)and damages for fraud.

    What a nightmare we are all under!
    Then the Republican’s get voted back into Congress where they will allow all this ponzi sceme to continue until we live in a homeless America! Wall Street owns the Congress and the media….

    What to do?
    Protest in the streets now that 2 million more have been cut off of their only income on unemployment….

    Hope all of you that voted them back in can finally “see” what ignorance produces!

    God Bless Us All…

    • Collene Collins says:

      You are having the same luck as me MA sucks. I always believed that the truth and proof that the law was ignored. $40,000 later and Judge ruled in banks favor even though the house was sold 10 days before our due date and we were not in arrears. We never even had a copy of note so it was never a legal contract it was unilateral. Also proof of perjury and forgery. I am so sick of trying to find an ethical person who has a voice that will be heard. Our case is unreal.

  38. tina says:

    Hi Tim,
    Just wanted to thank you for your the templates you post to help pro-per folks with their pleadings. I used 2 of them, changed them to fit my needs, got them filed and went to my first hearing. Well, my brain turned to mush…but as the Judge was kind enough to help me get started, it did not go so bad I think. He set a court date for, as he put it, enjoining the foreclosure with the injunction hearing”?? He wanted all parties present (oh this was ex-parte) And he said on the merits of my case I should previal. I hope this is a good sign.

    But without those templates, and using the information, looking up the court cases you provided and the statutes and codes, I would have not been able to get past typing my name and address. I know it will be a long road ahead, I am already getting calls from defendants stating they are not an interested party anymore. After spending the last 3 1/2 years of trying to talk to them, they are not calling me..go figure.

    Again, thank you. And I am sure those that are like me and can not afford council, your help mean we stand at least a bit of chance to get our case into court.
    Oh..but I did go seek out council to check the documents I had before I did anything. I wanted to make sure it was not just a wish or a want that I was seeing, but it was true facts. And the lawyer was willing to take the unlimited case on a percentage..she said it was one of the best cases she has seen in years. So with that I started typing and filed an unlimited case with the help of your templates.
    But doing the order after hearing….please, please so a template of that. Spending hours at self help is unreal. If you get there at 8 am you may end up finding out that you will need to try again the next day. Those poor folks are packed all day.

  39. Pingback: Search terms for this blog « Timothymccandless's Weblog

  40. Dave says:

    I heard that there is a new class action lawsuite out there where we can go after the banking industry if we were foreclosed on wrongfully. Could someone please let me know what the site or phone number is. I reside in Michigan and my bank was Chase. They have admitted to being wrong when I go into the bank but no one will answer my phone calls or fix the problem. The sheriff’s are going in there this next 2 weeks to remove everything from the house. Could someone please send me information. Thanks

  41. Texas says:

    What do I need to do to Join the class action wrongful foreclosure suit – I am post foreclosure.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s