Skip to main content

View Diary: “No End In Sight” (147 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Good news! (12+ / 0-)

    Though I hesitate even to believe there could be such a thing, amid the deepening gloom---the advantage so baked-in to the system as to be irreperable absent radical remaking; the JOBS act, which institutionalizes criminality as a business model; the unstaffed, unfunded Potemkin mortgage settlement panel; the evidence of an extinction event threshhold from the Gulf; the increase in the reach (but not the grasp) of the American empire; the jettisoning of all pretense by the Speaker of the House (where are you, Sam Rayburn?  Henry Clay?) that he is a) truthful, b) acting on any principle except runaway personal enrichment, c) anything but a douche.

    But--and surely you saw this, too, Bobswern--the suit brought by Doug Welborn, East Baton Rouge Parish Clerk of Court, against MERSCORP Shareholders and Trustees, promises to lift the darkness somewhat, even maybe break some corner of corruption up.

    The suit seeks compensation for unpaid recording fees in more than 30 Louisiana parishes.  This universal bankster practice has resulted of course in unclear title to any mortgage issued in Louisiana while the MERS system of electronic title tracking system was in place.  But the beauty of the suit is that Welborn is not going after the banks on behalf of consumers--justified as that might be.  He is pursuing this as a RICO case, claiming criminal conspiracy by the banks to avoid paying mandated recording fees.  (For which the banks presumably collected fees at closing.)

    It has a good chance of succeeding because it is not a more unwieldy class action suit, and because it just seeks repayment of fees legally owed the parishes.  Furthermore, the banks' own documents claim they enabled MERS for precisely the purpose of avoiding the payment of these fees.

    The suit is for a billion dollars.  If it succeeds in Louisiana, it has a good likelihood of being taken up elsewhere.  Criminal charges could follow.

    Until I learn the inevitable details that will sink this suit, I am hanging on to this hope.

    •  fees - optional (0+ / 0-)

      taxes - mandatory

      Recording is a user fee based service that is offered to the public.

      Just because McDonald's offers hamburgers for sale doesn't mean I have to eat them.

      •  I hope your position is not upheld (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        dharmafarmer, AnnCetera

        ...though, given the courts, my confidence is less than strong.  But I disagree with it, nevertheless.  

        According to the attorney bringing the suit:

        We believe they’re required by law to pay recording fees every time they change these mortgages. In other words, every time they transfer a mortgage they’re supposed to pay a recording fee to the county, by law. And they set up this system to avoid that.
        ..They’re required by law to record these mortgages with a county government official. There’s no doubt about that. There is no – the federal law requires that. And they are not living up to the federal law. It’s not – there isn’t any, in our opinion as lawyers in this case, there’s no debate over that. We know, based on federal laws, that they are required to record that with a local county government, and they are not doing that. They have not been doing that for over 10 years.
    •  Title companies have tracked (0+ / 0-)

      real estate ownership for decades, long before MERS.

      •  yes, but they (4+ / 0-)

        also had them recorded with the county, when required.

        From the suit:

        each of the Defendants has conducted and/or participated in the conduct of the MERS Enterprise’s affairs through a pattern of racketeering activity in violation of RICO, 18 USC § 1962(c), by engaging in numerous acts of mail fraud and/or wire fraud. False representations or fraudulent pretenses made by defendants include:

        1) misrepresenting to homeowners, investors and MERS members the need for recordation of assignments in the parish records;

        2) mailing and/or electronically transmitting false notices, including foreclosure documents, to Plaintiffs, homeowners and others;

        3) actively concealing its lack of valid assignments from investors, Plaintiffs, and homeowners.

        That these entities cannot establish clean title is a huge problem, one clerks in several states have tried to come to legal grips with.  Google "fraudulent reconveyances."
      •  Title companies don't track anything. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        zedaker, roseeriter

        They send out a title abstracter to go into the land records office and look into deeds several transactions back.

        They will go further in case a suit is brought. They don't track anything.

    •  Good news on battle against MERS! tx! n/t (0+ / 0-)

      The important and difficult job is never to find the right answers, it is to find the right question. For there are few things as useless–if not dangerous–as the right answer to the wrong question. -- P. Drucker

      by The Angry Architect on Sun Apr 29, 2012 at 04:57:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site