01 Wrongfull foreclosure Vallejo, California

4 Responses to “01 Wrongfull foreclosure Vallejo, California”

  1. TIREDOFTHEINJUSTICE June 17, 2011 at 5:23 am #

    DO YOU ONLY HANDLE CALIFORNIA??????

  2. heart keeper July 17, 2011 at 9:47 am #

    I found the case of carney vs, B of A. Apparently, its been removed from all sites. Would happen to a copy or the case number to what district court it was in

  3. Good Evening :
    Reading Your write up has given Me mnew hopes,in 2008 I was trying to get a Loan modification,and as the Radio,T,V.and news Papers go to Your linder,that I did,when I wrote they in my last letter ,They stated ,give them a mounth or two something to that effect,any way they foreclosed On Me it was a great Suprise,bu being a law obiding,I turned over the property arround the 28 November n08 a wear later I received a letter stateing from the President nOffice in Orange county Ca, my house been sold thrue wrong doing of CITI bank Employees,and were fired,and also ite evection happen later part of 08I have felt I should ber well covered,since the law states mid 08.
    Any way if You feel theres help Please let Me Know,Please Call Me Buster,that way I will know its from You,Bank Of Americe worked with Me last in July 2011 thanks for reading my letter,will vcl;ose with Wishfull Thinking. E-Mail Rutherfordhr@aol.com 21550 mBox springsn Rd #2078 Moreno Valley Ca.92557 again I say thank You. Rutherford B. Hyde

  4. Spooner July 19, 2013 at 2:31 am #

    The next housing shock
    FEDERAL COURT JUDGE,WELLS FARGO BANK COMPLICITE IN FRAUDULENT DOCUMENT COVER UP.
    5, JULY 2013 WRITER
    On May 11, 2010, Lamont Johnson a Sacramento, California picky pay loan victim filed an action against Wachovia Bank FSB and its agents in the Northern District of California. Facing foreclosures and evictions by Wells Fargo Bank Johnson with little cash attempted to become a part of a pending Class Action case filed in the Northern District before Judge Jeremy Fogel (Mandrigues v. World Savings Bank, Inc., et al.) Upon Filing his case, Johnson immediately served Wells Fargo banks, Unlawful Detainer Attorney, Fred Kaiser. Wells Fargo Attorney Kaiser ignored the complaint. Johnson’s case was subsequently transferred from the Northern District to the Eastern District of Sacramento on October 21, 2010 Case NO. 2:10-cv-02839, Johnson vs. Wachovia Bank FSB et al. Johnson initially filed his case Pro Se and later hired Attorney Roxanne Mosley. Mosley represented Johnson for a short period of time eventually abandoning Johnson’s case.
    On or about August 31, 2011 Johnsons case came before newly appointed Eastern District Court Judge Carolyn Delaney. October 6, 2011 Delaney filed an Order to Show Cause. On October 21, 2011 Johnson filed a Substitution of Attorney and a response to the Delaney Order to show Cause. Just entering the case, Johnson had been requesting from Delaney time to restructure and update his claim because there were defects in his First amended complaint and so much more violations that had occurred since Johnson’s original filing. Delaney denied Johnson that opportunity and on April 11, 2012, Document Query 46, Delaney ordered Johnson to Serve on Defendants Wells Fargo Bank Johnsons defective complaint drafted by Johnson’s previous Attorney Mosley. Defendants Wells Fargo Bank after being served immediately filed a Motion to dismiss. Delaney thereafter decided on her own and in violation of her oath, her duty and the law, set Johnsons case on a course to intentionally dismiss his case.
    As Johnson filed his opposition to Defendant Wells Fargo Banks, Motion to dismiss, Johnson attached his proposed Second amended complaints to his answers, despite Delaney’s attempt to stop him from repairing his claims. Johnson added claims of Quiet Title, Racketeering under Rico, Mail Fraud, Wire Fraud, Conspiracy to foreclose using false and fraudulent document and affricatives. Johnson attached documented evidence showing that Wells Fargo Bank employees robo-signed and used forged and false documents to foreclose. Some of Johnsons attached evidence show that documents were notarized but not even signed. Johnson even attached documents that were back dated. To top it off, Johnson showed that defendants made a material alteration on his Deed of Trust for his Yorktown Property. It was changed from its original form and filed with the wrong address. Johnson’s Yorktown property Deed of Trust clearly illegally had an unreferenced attachment to it in an attempt to repair the defect in the legal description. The attachment was done after Johnson signed the contract. What was most difficult for Johnson to deal with was that he was disabled and going through a major depression and stress at the time and seeking counseling. Johnson always informed Delaney in his documents to be patient with him because he was going through this and it will take him more time to complete his Second Amended complaint. Delaney ignored Johnson’s documents.
    On September 12, 2012 Delaney moved forward with defendant Wells Fargo’s Motion to dismiss trail. Transcripts show that District Court Judge Delaney conducted the trial to look procedural, but it was a sham trial. Despite all the evidence of fraud , and serious causes of actions Johnson claimed, Delaney intentionally and in violation of her oath and Duty suppressed all Johnson’s arguments, case law, arguments and evidence and refused at the hearing to allow any allegations of fraud to be put on record. Delaney asked both Johnson and Defendants Wells Fargo one main question. What is your legal theory? Delaney thereafter dismissed Johnson’s unfinished second amended complaint on the spot.
    The mistake that District Court Judge Delaney made was that she drafted, filed and mailed fraudulent Findings and Recommendations conclusion order #65 that dismissed Johnson’s case by intentionally misrepresenting Johnson’s legal theory and by suppressing Johnson’s legal arguments and Fraud evidence that were attached to his complaint. Delaney intentionally drafted her order to construe around case law and evidence Johnson presented as if they did not exist. District Court Judge Delaney knew of Defendant Wells Fargo Banks fraudulent activities. They were common knowledge. Delaney’s employer along with 49 other States Attorney Generals, were part of a nationwide Class Action which identified the same fraudulent conduct by these same defendants. Delaney intentionally suppressed Johnson’s evidence because she did not want a Pro Se Plaintiff (Johnson) to win his case. District Court Judge Delaney knew that if she acknowledged verbally or in writing the fraud that she would be required to leave Defendants Wells Fargo Bank right where they stand without a defense. Delaney refused to allow this to happen as duty required her to do.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: