Modern Day Rosa Parks Jailed As Domestic Terrorist:

God-Fearing Woman Exposes Foreclosure Fraud

Who: Family and Friends of Barbara Bratton, Homeowners’ Rights Advocate

What: Pre-Preliminary Conference (Court Hearing)

When: Monday, June 24, 2014, 8:30 a.m.

Where: Dept. S22, San Bernardino Superior Court

351 N. Arrowhead, San Bernardino, CA. 92415 Map

Ignoring well-documented cases of fraud and abuse that continue to plague the home mortgage industry, the City of Ontario Police Department has instead set its sights on Barbara Bratton, 55, jailed as a domestic terrorist for challenging the validity of property records used to foreclose on her loan. A pre-preliminary conference is set for Monday, June 24 at 8:30am in San Bernardino Superior Court, 351 N. Arrowhead, San Bernardino, CA 92415. Homeowners’ rights advocates will be on hand to show support.


Barbara Bratton, a life-long resident of Ontario, California and an outstanding community member, was the victim of an illegal foreclosure on her family home of 40 years. Since 2008 she has conducted a tireless and well-documented campaign to expose the land title fraud on her home. An important piece in this complex case came last year, when a Lending Processing Services (LPS) executive pled guilty to filing more than a million fraudulent property documents in county recorder’s offices across the country. The fraud on the Bratton home was linked to the suit. Yet the LPS scheme masked a more insidious crime: the securitization of nearly all home loans since 1996, making it impossible to determine who, if anyone, actually owns the note on a home.

To back up her case, Ms. Bratton began working with San Bernardino County Recorder Dennis Draeger and his staff to conduct a thorough search of the property records on her home. In a signed declaration authorized by Draeger, his custodian of records concluded that the involved parties lacked the authority to foreclose on the Bratton home. To set the record straight, Ms. Bratton filed a corrective deed at the County Recorder’s office on April 11, 2013 — a preliminary step towards gaining court recognition of fraudulent foreclosure. To insure proper procedure, she asked the Secretary of State’s Office to validate the document with their seal before filing with the county recorder. For additional insurance, she attached a copy of her 2012 notice to the police of title fraud with her request to have them investigate (a request they ignored.)

Ms. Bratton’s actions to correct property records on the family home were fully above board, with no intent to harm or defraud. The City of Ontario’s punitive efforts to defame Ms. Bratton reveal how desperate officials are to ignore the fraud that continues to pollute property records in a county with some of the highest foreclosure rates in the country. Until property records are corrected, judges will continue to sanction illegal foreclosures, and the perpetrators will go unpunished.

On Dec 2, 1955 Rosa Parks became a Civil Rights Activist by refusing to give up her seat on a bus leading to an end of segregation. She died with honors in 2005, a few months after Barbara Bratton was given predatory financing by “lender”, First Franklin.

Homeowners’ Rights advocates will be on hand for the hearing at 8:30 a.m. on Monday, June 24thto show their support for Barbara Bratton in her fight for justice on behalf of hundreds of thousands of homeowners who have become unwitting victims of fraudulent financing and foreclosure practices.



Barbara Bratton has been charged with 5 felony counts: 2 violations of Penal Code Section 460(d) forgery, and 2 counts of PC 115(a) procuring and offering false or forged instrument. She has also been charged with 1 count of PC 459 second degree burglary. Law enforcement authorities are alleging she is a domestic terrorist. Bail has been set at $250.000.

Supporting documents:

Court documents available upon request.


Geraldine Watson – Email: Cell: 909-215-6265

Brenda Orea – Email: Cell: 909-243-0449

Dolly Medlock – Email: Cell: 909-489-3621

Susan Daya Hamwi – Email: susandaya@yahoo.comCell: 310-210-7550

Lydia Breen – Email: Cell: 661-414-2862

OCC Minimum Standards Handling Borrower Foreclosure Files

From: Charles Cox []
Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 1:23 PM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: OCC Minimum Standards Handling Borrower Foreclosure Files

From Neil Garfield: (I’ve attached the documents from the Fed)

Editor’s Note: Some banks are slowing foreclosures and evictions. The reason is that the OCC issued a directive or letter of guidance that lays out in brief simplistic language what a party must do before they can foreclose. There can be little doubt that none of the banks are in compliance with this directive although Bank of America is clearly taking the position that they are in compliance or that it doesn’t matter whether they are in compliance or not.

In April the OCC, responding to pressure from virtually everyone, issued a guidance letter to financial institutions who are part of the foreclosure process. While not a rule a regulation, it is an interpretation of the Agency’s own rules and regulation and therefore, in my opinion, is both persuasive and authoritative.

These 13 questions published by OCC should be used defensively if you suspect violation and they are rightfully the subject of discovery. Use the wording from the letter rather than your own — since the attorneys for the banks will pounce on any nuance that appears to be different than this guidance issued to the banks.

The first question relates to whether there is a real default and what steps the foreclosing party has taken to assure itself and the court that the default is real. Remember that the fact that the borrower stopped paying is not a default if no payment was due. And there is no default if it is cured by payment from ANYONE after the declaration of default. Thus when the subservicer continues making payments to the "Creditor" the borrower’s default is cured although a new liability could arise (unsecured) as a result of the sub servicer making those payments without receiving payment from the borrower.

The point here is the money. Either there is a balance or there is not. Either the balance is as stated by the forecloser or it is not. Either there is money due from the borrower to the servicer and the real creditor or there is not. This takes an accounting that goes much further than merely a printout of the borrower’s payment history.

It takes an in depth accounting to determine where the money came from continue the payments when the borrower was not making payments. It takes an in depth accounting to determine if the creditor still exists or whether there is an successor. And it takes an in depth accounting to determine how much money was received from insurance and credit default swaps that should have been applied properly thus reducing both the loan receivable and loan payable.

This means getting all the information from the "trustee" of the REMIC, copies of the trust account and distribution reports, copies of canceled checks and wire transfer receipts to determine payment, risk of loss and the reality of whether there was a loss.

It also means getting the same information from the investment banker who did the underwriting of the bogus mortgage bonds, the Master Servicer, and anyone else in the securitization chain that might have disbursed or received funds in connection with the subject loan or the asset pool claiming an interest in the subject loan, or the owners of mortgage bonds issued by that asset pool.

If the OCC wants it then you should want it for your clients. Get the answers and don’t assume that because the borrower stopped making payments that any default occurred or that it wasn’t cured. Then go on to the other questions with the same careful analysis.


Judgments reversed, demurrers sustained without leave to amend overruled for defendants withholding discovery of facts to induce them to enter defaulted loans

From: Charles Cox []
Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:25 PM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: Judgments reversed, demurrers sustained without leave to amend overruled for defendants withholding discovery of facts to induce them to enter defaulted loans

Plaintiffs argue that they had sufficiently alleged delayed discovery of facts that defendants had purposely withheld from them in order to induce them to enter into the now defaulted loans. We agree. We shall thus reverse the judgments of dismissal with directions to overrule the demurrers.

Charles Wayne Cox
Email: mailto:Charles
Websites:; and
1969 Camellia Ave.
Medford, OR 97504-5403
(541) 727-2240 direct
(541) 610-1931 eFax

Paralegal; Litigation Support and Expert Witness Services; Forensic Loan Analyst; CA Licensed Real Estate Broker.

Fuller v. First Franklin Fin. .docx

Mers does not work in Oregon finally FW: Supreme Court Decision in Niday rendered today. See attached.

From: Charles Cox []
Sent: Friday, June 07, 2013 4:37 AM
Cc: ‘AAli Mohammad’; ‘Alison Marlow’; ‘Andrew Cameron Bailey’; ‘Anita Carr’; ‘Ann Castro’; ‘Art Fleming’; ‘Barbara Gilbert’; ‘Barbara Griswold’; ‘Barbara Hart’; ‘Barbara Webb’; ‘Barry Blythe’; ‘Beth Findsen’; ‘Bill Paatalo’; ‘Bob Lund’; ‘Brenda Lutton-Coronado’; ‘Brent Hunsberger’; ‘Brian Davies’; ‘Brian Longley’; ‘Bruce Kamperman’; ‘Carl Cox’; Carol Molloy; ‘Carson Pay’; ‘Catherine King’; ‘CFOmkin’; ‘Charles Koppa’; ‘Chris Ebling’; ‘Chris McLaughlin’; ‘Christian Kluge’; ‘Christie Baca’; ‘Christopher Thompson’; ‘Chuck east’; ‘Claude bennett’; ‘Clayton’; ‘Clint Allen’; ‘Colin Davis’; ‘Colin Doyle’; ‘Constance Anne Dudley’; ‘Dan Hanecak’; Dan McCauley; ‘Daniel Edstrom’; ‘Darrell Blomberg’; ‘Dave Mowett’; ‘David Fahrny’; ‘David Silber’; ‘Deby Morrow’; ‘Denny Armstrong’; ‘Derrick Barnett’; ‘Don Klug’; ‘Don Loeb’; ‘Doug Gillies’; ‘Ed Peckham’; ‘Ellen Brown’; ‘Felix Trejo’; ‘Frank DeCarlo’; ‘Gail Williamson’; ‘Gary Silverman’; ‘George Bye’; ‘George Christian’; ‘George Daniel’; ‘Gerald Gandrup’; ‘Grace Adams’; ‘Harry Paez’; ‘Iris Lansdown’; ‘Jake Naumer’; ‘James Chappell’; ‘James Stout’; ‘Jean’; Jeffrey Cancilla; ‘Jeffrey Olson’; ‘Jim Curtis’; ‘Joanne Kopp’; ‘Joe Caracciolo’; ‘John Dunn’; ‘John St. Claire’; ‘Jon Lindeman’; ‘Joseph La Costa’; ‘Josiah Morgan’; ‘Judy Hoffman’; ‘Judy Moore’; ‘Kartika Ingram’; ‘Kathie Lustig’; Kaye DeVito; ‘Ken Johnson’; ‘Kerry Hurd’; ‘Kimberly Cromwell’; ‘Lee Ann Hildhal’; ‘Leon Miles’; ‘Linda Hamilton’; ‘Linda Howarth’; ‘Lizette Espinosa’; ‘Luis Reyes’; ‘Lynette Rhodes’; ‘Marc Findsen’; ‘Marilyn Yee’; ‘Mario Marsden’; ‘Mark Didak’; ‘Marla Buchwald’; ‘Marshall Foxworthy’; ‘Matt Cee’; ‘Matt Crehan’;; ‘Michael Moore’; Michelle Constantini; ‘Neil Garfield’; neil larkins; ‘Norm Redhead’; ‘Oktay Senvar’; ‘Patrick Hutchinson’; ‘Patti Lyles’; ‘Peter Coleman’; ‘Phil Johnson’; ‘Phyllis Harb’; ‘Precy Haw’; ‘Rami’; ‘Rami Nabi’; ‘Ramirez’; ‘Ramon Fuentes’; ‘Reinhold Sommerstedt’; ‘Rich Billin’; ‘Richard Hall’; ‘Richard Hubbard’; ‘Robert Bows’; ‘Robert Kincaid’; ‘Rod Ciferri’; ‘Ron Freshman’; ‘Ronda Edgar’; ‘Satish Shetty’; ‘Shai Benmoshe’; ‘Sheri Deterling’; ‘Simona’; ‘Stan Thompson’; ‘Stephen Agar’; ‘Steve Campbell’; ‘Steve Foos’; ‘Steve Skidmore’; ‘Susan Lange’; ‘Suzanne Clements’; ‘Tim Fong’; ‘Tim McCandless’; ‘Todd Reilly’; ‘Valerie Lopez’; ‘Vermont Trotter’; ‘Vince Nguyen-NLG’; ‘Vinluan Manny’; ‘Will Doherty’; ‘William Ball’
Subject: Supreme Court Decision in Niday rendered today. See attached.

Niday reverse of appeal confirmed by Supreme Court of Oregon.

Charles Wayne Cox
Email: mailto:Charles
Websites:; and
1969 Camellia Ave.
Medford, OR 97504-5403
(541) 727-2240 direct
(541) 610-1931 eFax

Paralegal; Litigation Support and Expert Witness Services; Forensic Loan Analyst; CA Licensed Real Estate Broker.


The Stealth Problem of Predatory Mortgage Modifications

From: Charles Cox []
Sent: Tuesday, June 04, 2013 5:29 AM
To: Charles Cox
Subject: Mortgage Modification Problems

For those of you that are advocates of “loan modifications” (which I am not)…you might find this an interesting take. My position has always been, you cannot “modify” something you do not own and if you could, why not simply refinance. (if you read a “loan modification” agreement…it is only a forbearance and mechanism for the servicer to claim and finance its alleged payments to the purported “investor” and to continue collecting servicing fees and to keep from initiating repurchase agreements)!

>And even in this article…stating the word “banks” is like scratching your fingernails on the blackboard when I hear it.<


%d bloggers like this: