Are ALL MERS Deeds of Trust / Mortgages VOID?
The facts regarding mers (mortgage electronic registration systems, inc.):
1. MERS is not a lender, creditor or bank, although they are listed on approx. 60 million mortgage security instruments.
2. MERS has no agency status as anominee
3. MERS does not lend or extend credit.
4. MERS does not service mortgage accounts
5. MERS does not hold Promissory Notes in possession.
6. MERS has NEVER owned or received ANY Beneficial interest in ANY Mortgage EVER!
The customized form of Mortgage / Deeds of Trust utilized by Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems Inc., (MERS), does not entitle MERS to any of the statutory mortgagee protections provided in the provisions of Federal and State Law.
A Nominee Mortgagee is simply not entitled to the statutory benefits. The provisions are strictly construed against MERS putative conveyance since the statutory provisions are in derogation of common law. For example, MERS mortgagee deeds
have two entities exercising the same statutory foreclosure powers. Law only protects the actual holders of the mortgage deed or their statutory assigns, not nominees which nominees only have a role with stocks and bonds. MERS argues, in a futile exercise of nominalism, that splitting the term mortgagee from the lender has a benefit to itself. MERS mortgage deeds are defective because the Statutory protections run to functional powers of the holders of the mortgage and of the mortgage notes, not to self defined nominees.
Nominees are not eligible to hold future interests in property without statutory assignments. Only statutory assignees can exercise the functional abilities necessary to gain control of the five (5) statutory elements required to provide a clean title at the end of the process. Statutory protections run to the holders of the mortgages, not their nominees.
When MERS does not have an actual separate written and recorded conveyance from the actual holder of the mortgage to itself prior to MERS making a conveyance, the conveyance is void.
MERS by its own description in paragraph C is not contractually able to perform the statutory functions of the holder of the mortgagee. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Incorporated, as a putative nominee, selected by the Mortgagor, usually lacks actual recorded authority from the Holder of the Mortgage by way of a recorded or a recorded power of an attorney. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Incorporated can not by its own definition be a holder of the mortgage deed. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems Incorporated did not own or possess or control the mortgage note which was necessary
to enforce the mortgage deed as required by UCC-3-301.
These facts are becoming difficult to dispute, from a Judges perspective given the recent Supreme Court decisions, and the following cases among many others:
In re: Jacobsen
In re: Hennessey
In re: Mitchell
In re: Hawkins
Ohio
New York judge Schack
MERS v. Southwest Homes of Arkansas
Landmark V. Kesler
Riggs v. Aurora (Fl. 4DCA, Case No. 4D08-4635, decided
4/21
Jerman v. Carlisle
Bellistri V. Ocwen
Dist. Ct. Case No. 2:09-CV-00661-KJD-LRL
Bankr. Ct. Case No. BK-S-07-16645-LBR
In Re Wells Bankruptcy Oh Nd Decision 22 Jun
US BANK V. Ibanez
Recent decisions rendered by three Federal District Court Judges relating to mortgage foreclosure actions in Ohio have generated a lot of attention in the press and various newsletters. MANY MORE CASES ARE CURRENTLY PENDING
Just because MERS claims its ability to misuse the word nominee in any way that is beneficial, this does not CHANGE 200 years of property law.
A continuing theme that demonstrates the title defect, the questionable conduct of pretender lenders and the defects in the foreclosure process when you let companies with big brand names bluff the system. The fatal MERS GAP arises whether MERS is actually the nominee on the deed of trust (or mortgage deed) or not. It is an announcement that there will be off record transactions between parties who have no interest in the loan but who will assert such an interest once they have successfullly fabricated documents, had someone without authority sign them, on behalf of an entity with no real beneficial interest or
other economic interest in the loan, and then frequently notarized by someone in another state. We have even seen documents notarized in blank and forged signatures of borrowers on loan closing papers.
The fact is, anyone who pays the MERS membership fee (just like AAA Automobile club) can sign on behalf of MERS to assign or otherwise conduct foreclosure activities.
Wake up folks MERS is a SHAM. Everyone knows it and there is no factual basis to support their assertions to rights to foreclose. Even if MERS assigns to another party: You cannot assign something you never had.
One word sums it up: FRAUD.
0 comments