Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Massachusetts joins Tennessee, KingCast and Mortgage Movies, sues MERS for $22M for failing to prove loan ownership.... New Hampshire is still in the dark ages and does not care. That will change.
Dear Judge Nicolosi and any other Judge in NH who is partial to slamming pro se litigants in these contested foreclosure proceedings that will increase exponentially in the coming months and years:
When I was managing Alpha Title Company as a licensed Title Insurance Producer 6 years ago we all thought "how nifty, a nice little virtual depository for loans, but as time wore on we began to have some serious questions, now the chickens resemble turkeys come home to roost. KingCast and Mortgage Movies will be following this and cross posting to the excellent websites at Living Lies ("Pretenders Painted into a Corner" with Mortgage Movies video with Judge Nicolosi) and 4Closurefraud ("MERS Come Clean and Pay up, $22M.)" More tales of whoa here in the Tennessee litigation.
Saturday, February 19, 2011
Nashua Judge Diane Nicolosi does not care too much about Standing, clouds on title or missing assignments, when it comes to foreclosure the sun is always shining in New Hampshire!
Cross post @ Living Lies, "Why Judges don't want to rule for borrowers." Living Lies is an amazing resource for anyone seeking to learn about America's fraudulent mortgage industry. As noted in this Living Lies journal entry, "Good Video on KingCast: Pretenders Painted into a Corner,"
Sunday, February 6, 2011
NJ Court slams Wells Fargo in Wells Fargo v. Sandra Ford; Ohio was first in Wells Fargo v. Jordan, will NH be next with Jeanne Ingress case?
Here is Wells Fargo v. Sandra Ford, enjoy today's feature presentation.
On appeal, defendant argues that (1) Wells Fargo failed to establish that it is the holder of the negotiable note she gave to Argent and therefore lacks standing to pursue this foreclosure action; (2) even if Wells Fargo is the holder of the note, it failed to establish that it is a holder in due course and therefore, the trial court erred in concluding that Wells Fargo is not subject to the defenses asserted by defendant based on Argent’s alleged predatory and fraudulent acts in connection with execution of the mortgage and note; and (3) even if Wells Fargo is a holder in due course, it still would be subject to certain defenses and statutory claims defendant asserted in her answer and counterclaim.