Balancing the Scales of Justice for Pro Se Homeowners

If Schack gets it why don’t our California Courts?

Posted by on Mar 20, 2012

Yesterday, March 19, 2012, Judge Schack went before the US House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. (Read Judge Schack Testimony) His testimony describes in detail, the abuses and fraud he is seeing being perpetrated by the National Banks and their army of well financed attorneys.  What he describes are not mere technicalities – documents filed out of sequence, an undated document, or some mere technicality that really caused no prejudice against the homeowner.  What he describes is out right theft and fraud.

                Schack oversees the about 20% of the foreclosure lawsuits that are filed in Kings County in New York State;  that represents 400 to 500 homeowners.   While he shares details of things that many of us are seeing in our wrongful fraudclosures – missing assignments, robo signers, an individual that signs by whatever title for whatever entity they need to sign for to get the asset to their real employer – what is telling is that in his discussions with the bank attorneys they admit “We have no idea who the investor is”.  

                If the attorney doesn’t know, who does and why is the identity of the investor not disclosed to the attorney who is representing them at the foreclosure, supposedly on behalf of the investor?  New York is a judicial foreclosure state; in order to get a judgment of foreclosure the judge must review and approve the paperwork.  Schack, God Bless this man, noticed irregularities and started asking questions even though the homeowners weren’t showing up for the hearings.   Here is his simple philosophy (page 2 of his testimony):

  • As a judge I am neutral
  • My role is to apply the law equally to all parties, on a level playing field
  • Due process of law must be followed
  • As a judge he took an oath to uphold the constitution – including “nor any state shall deprive any person of…property, without due process of law nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the law.”

These are not novel, undeveloped concepts.  These are 100’s of years of law that our great nation was built on, so what does it say that the judges in California can’t be bothered?  We have those that DO care and DO take their oath seriously – but the majority does not.  I have read some interesting rulings – and there are some that the homeowner lost and frankly, I see why.  The pleadings are bizarre – I can’t even understand what the homeowner (or property owner) was saying much less grasp the grounds on which they lodged their complaint.  But there are others – mine included – where the judge failed to grasp the concepts and rather than investigating and educating themselves, they move it off their desk because it was just “too complex” to understand – ruling in favor of the bank based on whatever one thing it is they grasp. 

In my UD last year the Commissioner was so biased and prejudicial, he actually came out and said, ‘If the name on the TDUS is the same as the one on the complaint, then they have a right to evict”.  He didn’t say – “well if the TDUS is the same as the complaint, and you don’t dispute the validity of the TDUS” – his mind was made up; and when I DID contest the complaint and wanted to present evidence, he pulled the ole’ “Tender is required” card – which for the record NONE of the statutes (CCC §§ 2924 or 1161a) have a tender requirement.

As a non judicial state it is (well wasn’t) common for a foreclosure to come into court; the wrongful foreclosure action was rare and as such, I do understand that the judges are not experts in the foreclosure statutes much less securitization.  But does that excuse their bias towards the banks and lack of questioning what they are seeing?  If Phil Ting can get an audit done on records that show 84% of the records violate the law, why do these same documents and violations escape our courts?  (Read foreclosure-in-california-2-12 SF County)  If our Attorney General can say, “hey this fraud is not a surprise to my office or the homeowners in this state”, why is it a surprise to the courts?

MERS is fraudulent enterprise that has hidden the path of the Note – actually they don’t hide it, they just make up whatever path the Bank tells them to make up – but our California Courts recognize it as a legitimate enterprise.  If the bank is saying the Note was sold from originator to seller to aggregator to depositor to the REMIC Trust but the assignment from MERS to the REMIC Trust is all that is ever filed, isn’t that assignment a lie?

I have no answer as to why the California Courts are so eager to support the banks massive fraud in our great state;  I know not all of the Courts are but most do.  I do know that as a homeowner you have to have a cohesive argument that details the fraud – it can’t be allegations made up of from some wild theory you read or heard about.   The first step is having a valid, cohesive argument, the next is  getting the court to hear you; then you have to make sure that every time your due process rights are violated, every time the court does not apply the law “equally” you document it and fight it.   That is the only way we will turn the tide of massive fraud and demand that the judges in this great state remember and honor the oath they took. And i would definitely pull excerpts from Schack’s testimony as a gentle reminder to the courts of their oath.




Join the conversation and post a comment.

  1. allen sanford

    Everything that is said in this article is true. I sincerely hope that Governor Jerry Brown and Attorney General Kamamla Harris have read it. The so called “Homeowner’s Bill of Rights”, due to take affect in January of 2013 will allow the banks to sell property that is not the primary residence. The elderly and low income homeowners are being discriminated against. Lawyers in California won’t take individual cases. They put people into mini class action case that deal with a generality. If I were able to present my evidence in court, all foreclosures that have been conducted in California that are associated with Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Inc.(MERS) would be void. I want my property back or the deed. The property has been sold. the mortgage payments should come to me unless the property was sold in a cash transaction. If that was the case I want a check for the amount it was sold for plus interest! Please read Contact me at my email address or on Facebook.

  2. Erica Hutchison

    Amazing. I agree.


Forgot Password?

Join Us

Password Reset
Please enter your e-mail address. You will receive a new password via e-mail.