I'm hearing now that the FDIC packaged and sold WAMU notes but in a manner where they lost enforcement capability. This may very well be why the FDIC remains so uncooperative when homeowners tried to verify. Another interesting bit of law: The Federal Deposit Insurance Act, section 10, required the FDIC to have notified homeowners when notes are placed in receivership. The FDIC did not notify us or any of the thousands of homeowners Chase is trying to defraud.
The Uniform Commercial Code adopted by the 50 states requires ownership interests in real estate to be transferred by writing. Article III, Section 3.3 of the Purchase and Assumption Agreement between Chase and the FDIC specifies that all notes purchased by Chase from the FDIC be transferred by either a FDIC Receiver's Deed or a FDIC Receiver's Bill of Sale. If Chase cannot produce either, Chase did not buy your note.
All of the above notwithstanding the basic requirement that Chase produce your note and trust deed properly endorsed to Chase. There is an argument that since the transfers was an FDIC action, no writing is required. The operation of law authorizing FDIC takeovers only applies to the takeover itself. When the FDIC seeks to sell a note, the transfer must be in accordance with the host State.
Courts - many of them, simply will not apply the above described law in cases brought before them - particularly those brought in pro per. But keep pressing. A Judge who follows the law may someday be found. Usually judges appointed by Democrats. I am at firstname.lastname@example.org
JPMorgan Chase Bank continues to employ a fraudulent scheme concerning mortgage notes originated or controlled by former Washington Mutual Bank. Chase Bank has never been able to establish before any court throughout the United States standing to enforce a Washington Mutual note. Chase has been given a pass by many of the courts by not having to establish standing in the manner required by law. (Uniform Commercial Code adopted by the states) Instead, courts have enabled Chase to get by with the (infamous) Purchase and Assumption Agreement between Chase and the FDIC. Ironically this should not have been the case. Because Article III, Section 3.3 of the agreement, specifies how notes' ownership interest purchased by Chase were transferred by the FDIC to Chase. Either by a Receiver's Deed or by a Receiver's Bill of Sale. Without either, Chase should not be able to establish anywhere standing to enforce a WAMU note. All not withstanding the UCC and the requirement to produce the original notes - a requirement also not made necessary by the Courts. We are at email@example.com. Need to get the Chase/WAMU victims together because there is strength in humbers.
Interestingly...Mike and I are have many things in common. First, I'm in the same town/area he's in -in GA, a non judicial state. Secondly, I have a WAMU/CHASE Note that originated with Accredited Home Lenders, in April 2006. In July 06' WAMU began servicing the note. The serviced until Chase acquired their Assets in Sept. 08'.
The closing attorney recorded the note in our county court house in 2006.
MERS on behalf of Accredited Home Lenders and their Assessors RECORDED the
ONE and only assignment recorded on 10/12/2012.
The notary - Melissa Riley supposedly notarized out of Louisiana, the electronic document was recored by
NTC (National Title Clearing)
Out of Palm Harbor FLA.
Note that NTC, has sworn dispositions of Robo Signing from Bryan Bly & Crystal Moore at this location, also note the notary out another state.
Just as many others have stated Chase forwards a Modification Packet, after completing the package then returning in 2008/2009 Chase Reps advise that it won't be considered and reviewed for modification unless we are two payments in arrears. For Four years I've returned package after package only to be advised they hadn't received all the documents. We finally resort to meet directly with Chase Reps out of Fla directly when the are in the Convention Center in Atlanta in May 2012, the Chase Rep advises the paperwork is now complete that an Auditor would sign off and we would be Modified within a week. THIS DIDN'T HAPPEN, we sent emails, made phone calls to this Rep., we never heard from her again.
We believe it Chase had acknowledgement of their ability modify because they lacked possession of the actual note to lead them to fabricate and forge the assignment dated 10/12/2012. Prior assignment had never been recorded. This note was assigned to MERS and numbered however, when calling HOPE, they could not reference or provide any information in regards of investor or owner. I haven't had any success in locating it in the SEC. After numerous QWR, Chase replies stating they are Investor and Servicer but any other information in regards of servicing or ownership is confidential. Then January Payment comes due 2013, Chase refuses payment unless my husband and I sign some additional paperwork at one of their branch offices. By February Chase has had their Atlanta Attorneys Certify us with Foreclosure Proceedings for April 2nd. On March 29, we deliver a check for over $10k to Atlanta to reinstate the note. (mind in Jan we were 3 due of $1307. Each) upon delivery, I request a the original blue copy of the note. They provide a e-copy with an ALLONGE. This Allonge has never been provided in any of the prior QWR packets I'd recently received. This Allonge was blank signed by
LINDA CHEN-LUKE, Accredited Home Lenders. There was plenty of room on the last page of the note to have added this endorsement however an additional page was included unattached with the note pages. I was furious! This led me to research additional Legals finding Foreclosure Documents out of SC with another signed Allonge LINDA CHEN-LUKE Asst. Sec. Accredited Home Lenders, Completely different Signatures..Forged?? Fraudulent ???
While this has been lengthy... exposure is a necessity! Should you have interest in seeing a comparison of these two Allonges or have an interest in comparing your own email me
Article III, Section 3.3 of the infamous Purchase and Assumption Agreement specifies that all mortgage notes purchased by Chase from the FDIC be transferred by either a Receiver's Deed or by a Receiver's Bill of Sale. Since the P&A agreement includes this, Chase must produce either FDIC document to establish standing. The courts have not required either of those instruments, and has ruled in Chase's favor also without the original mortgage instruments. The P&A documents it seems could be a Homeowner's argument against Chase. We are at firstname.lastname@example.org
The FDIC receiver is the successor in interest to Washington Mutual Bank.
Chase cannot prove that the note was transferred to them by the Purchase and Assumption Agreement because there is no Schedule 3.1 of loans transferred.
So Chase will claim to have possession of the Note which will be endorsed in blank.
They will forge the note so that they can foreclose under the UCC. Yes! This is going on now around the nation.
Your questions cannot be answered without a full investigation. This means a person competent to read everthing alleged in the foreclosure complaint must be put on the job.
Chase now owns Wamu, so Chase owns all of Wamu's assets, if the deed was in their name, they will find a way if they have not already, to put it under their name. Good luck and if you are not making mortgage payments while you figure this all out, my advice is to hold and don't spend the money at all and do not put it in a bank account or spend it on vacations and cars. Once the dust settles and you need to make all the payments you missed you will have the cash stored away. I know of a couple who is dealing with the same issue and have been for over a year now. The bank is quiet for now but I'm sure something is brewing behind the scenes, its just a matter of time. Your checkmate move is the common line we hear today "show me the deed!" the logic behind this statement is, if the deed was sold to another bank then why would you owe anything?
Scenario: You borrow from bank to get house, bank keeps the deed in trust until you pay the money you owe them in full. Bank goes belly-up and sells all assets including your promissory note then the question becomes "where is the note?" new bank doesn't have it because it's stuck in storage under a ton of other deeds that nobody wants to or will ever touch and their systems don't have you on their records "its in the other banks system" The Home Owners stance is that they no longer owe the money if the note was sold (technically correct) the Bank's stance is that you borrowed the money so you need to pay it back. Naughty Naughty Banker, don't you know that double dipping is a no no?
This is how I understand it, please correct me if I'm wrong here so that I can update the database upstairs. :)
regardless - that Chase now owns it did when they took ovr Wamu it became theirs. mortgage notes are trading constantly. so more importantly you are facing foreclosure. contact an attorney,
contact the bank or this private investor to see what if anything you can work out with them to get it
current. perhaps you can qualify for a modification if you really can't afford your mortgage.888-995-4673 or http://www.995hope.org maybe they can help.
You need to speak to a real estate attorney and find out your rights. If you need help locating a great attorney, contact me, I know several that can help you. Good luck!
Mitchell S. Feldman
Associate Broker/ Director of Sales
Madison Estates & Properties, Inc.
Office: (718) 645-1665/ Cell: (917) 805-0783