MERS’ Owners Offer Bogus Title Certification

28 Jul

From: Charles Cox [mailto:charles@bayliving.com]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2012 5:10 AM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: MERS’ Owners Offer Bogus Title Certification

WE’VE GOT THEM ON THE RUN

Banks and servicers concede that title is probably not going their way in the courts

Editor’s Notes (from Neil Garfield):

SECURITIZATION SCAM REACHES NEW HIEGHTS IN DOCUMENT FABRICATION

In a bold move to head off obviously correct arguments about the lack of authenticity of title or authority to pursue fake foreclosures, the banks and services and title companies have come up with a new product: A Title Guarantee Certificate and Policy, that on its face will get Judges, lawyers and even homeowners thinking they were wrong to challenge the chain of ownership and that the foreclosure is legitimate. This gives cover to the investment bank who can now pitch bad loans over the fence onto investors who were explicitly and expressly protected from risks associated with bad or shaky loans.

Taken straight out of the pages of the con man’s playbook, the banks and servicers have come up with another fabricated piece of paper to waive in front of ignorant judges to prove that the chain of title "is what it is." This ignores the basic rule of evidence that while the title report and policy may be admitted into evidence they are not admitted (if the lawyer does his job) as to what is contained in them — nor, more importantly are they proof of title. But the newly minted "Foreclosure Title Guarantee Certificate and Policy" issued by 1st American title is probably going to shift the burden of persuasion over to the borrower at least temporarily. The only remedy for the homeowner is to file for discovery an convince the judge that you are entitled to full, complete, and accurate answers.

Here is the scam once used extensively with Lloyd’s of London. I had a client whose business was conning people out of their money but he stuck with large institutions and people with enough wealth they could afford to lose some money. He borrows several bars of lead made up in the shape of platinum bars. He buys a Lloyd’s certificate for a fee and his indemnification of Lloyd’s that neither he, nor anyone through him or even as co-beneficiary of the insurance policy will make a claim and if they do, he will pay for the defense and pay the damage award.

At the same time he has already sold the lead to someone else under an arrangement whereby he maintains the lead bars in the vault for safe-keeping. So like the rating companies and appraisers, Lloyd’s issues the policies, collects the fee, gets the signature of the buyer of the policy that no claims will be made, and Lloyd’s retreats into the background. So if Lloyd’s wants good faith money on deposit, this only reduces the "profit" or reward from the scam but it doesn’t eliminate it. At worst one scam will pay for the other.

The lead/iron bars are put into a high security vault with the Lloyd’s of London certificate, appearing to authenticate the bars as platinum and insuring them for millions of dollars. My client goes out and buys 3 Sheraton hotels in Houston using the "platinum" as collateral. He drains the hotels dry in three or four months, holds onto them another month or two and then gives the hotels back to the previous owners in lieu of foreclosure.

When the hapless former owners go to the vault and collect the collateral they bring it to a professional who states that it is not platinum it is lead and pretty rough lead at that looking nothing like platinum. So then they go to Lloyd’s who confirmed the issuance of the certificate and policy of insurance who informs them that the policy no longer covers the loss because of a breach of the indemnification.

This is what the banks, service companies and title companies who own MERS are suddenly coming up with and it is advertised that this special certificate and title insurance policy can be procured at the beginning or in the middle of a foreclosure. No such insurance product ever existed before and none will exist for very long now, but it might be enough to convince judges and demoralize homeowner and their attorneys to get another few hundred thousand foreclosures through the system.

What lawyer should do in practice is to demand to see the entire transaction and correspondence file. The title company will be forced to reveal the separate declaration in which the promise is made not to ever make a claim and that if there is one, the bank or servicer "indemnifies" the tile company and holds the title company harmless from any potential payment of any potential claim, although the payment will appear to look like it came from the title carrier. If they don’t show it, then they really are on the hook for the money supposedly guaranteed in the policy.

This is the same story as the fake securitization of badly originated loans in which the paperwork from the very start was wrong and the parties who loaned and borrowed money were left with no documents setting forth the terms of repayment — except the documentation contained in the PSA that establishes co-obligors and guarantors of payment.

Thus the newest document from the fake securitizers is another official looking instrument that effectively disposes of the issue of title — unless it is tested in court. The carrier dare not withhold the declaration that they can’t be responsible for payment without becoming responsible for payment bringing their exposure up from zero to hundreds of thousands of dollars on each transaction.

DO NOT ACCEPT TITLE POLICIES WITHOUT ASSURANCES THAT THEY WILL PAY AND THAT NO OTHER AGREEMENT EXISTS IN WHICH THE TITLE COMPANY IS PROTECTED FROM PAYING. ATTORNEYS SOULD BE ALERT FOR THIS IS A DEFINITE AREA OF POTENTIAL MALPRACTICE THAT IS MOST CERTAINLY GOING TO HIT OUR SHORES. HOMEOWNERS SHOULD MAKE CERTAIN THEY HIRE A LICENSED ATTORNEY WITH PLENTY OF EXPERIENCE IN NEGOTIATING THE TERMS OF THE TITLE COMMITMENT AND TITLE POLICY.

Advertisements

3 Responses to “MERS’ Owners Offer Bogus Title Certification”

  1. pegsworld123 July 28, 2012 at 10:40 pm #

    I have one of those!!!!!

    On MAY 18 2010, NWT Inc., acquired a Forced Default Guarantee Insurance Policy through First American Title Company (Policy No: 5002516-1280) – which was before the MAY 27 2010 notarization of Power of Attorney Assignment to NWT Inc. and before the recording of that assignment on JUNE 1 2010 in Ada County, Idaho.
    This was not a warranted “force-placed insurance.” due to an insufficient a lapse of coverage of Ms. Butcher’s standard homeowner’s insurance policy.

    It is the Insurance Policy that names THE TRUSTEE; Northwest Trustee Services, Inc., as one of the three Beneficiaries under the Insurance Policy.
    The other two named beneficiaries under the Insurance policy are the Law Firm; Routh Crabtree Olson, P.S, and the Loan Servicer; Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. However, the Insurance Policy does not name the Grantor or investor(s) as a beneficiary.
    Coincidently, the Trustee’s Deed of Trust was notarized on MAY 18 2011, in the State of Washington; on the one year anniversary of the Insurance policy of MAY 18 2010.
    is this a coincidence?????
    HELP
    PEG IN IDAHO

  2. johngault July 29, 2012 at 4:51 pm #

    I don’t think the title guarantee certificate is new. They’re rote in foreclosures, pretty sure. It may be new to try to introduce it to a court as alleged evidence of got me what….public record? (I give – what’s its evidentiary value?) But, if the deal as described is factual, what is new (?) is that by those mechanics, the bankster is the one guaranteeing title or indemnification against a claim for the ben of the title co, which might even be issuing insurance in the title co’s name if a third party is prohibitted from such an indemnification arrangement with a regulated industry? And are the title co’s actually interested parties
    (something like that) by virtue of who owns them? Aren’t they all one big happy family,
    anyway? I’d make it my business to find out, if necessary.
    If there is no prohibition on such an indemnification, or if the bankster cannot be seen as
    the partyactually insuring title by this arrangement (and It’s actually just the state of title, i.e., public record on the tgc, I think), then what we have is just one more fight, the evidentiary value of the tgc which won’t be authenticated, anyway.

  3. pegsworld123Peg August 24, 2012 at 7:37 pm #

    I called 1st american title to see if they paid out. They didn’t. It’s not an insurance policy one collects on. It’s like tittle insurance, after the fact. Even the underwriter had not heard of this type of insurance. Which begs the Q…if FHLMC is suing to evict, but they are not on record..not in the county records and it’s not a MERS loan, so they couldn’t hide it within the MERS syst. And here’s the clincher… FHLMC is not a beneficiary on this policy either. So how does it prove up title for FHLMC?
    Peg in Idaho

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: