THE MORTGAGE FRAUD PROCESS

If you have your original closing mortgage documents available, you’ll be able to flip through them and see what the mortgage company has done to defraud you. The two main documents that I will be referencing will be the ―Note and the ―Deed of Trust (or Mortgage). The note is commonly referred to as a promissory note. However, it is not a traditional promissory note.
The first thing that I’ll tell you is that at the end of this mortgage fraud/settlement process, which takes two to four months to complete (Faster if need be), based upon your individual circumstances, you will have free-and-clear title to your home. The reason I say that with confidence is because you are the rightful owner of your home. Look at your Deed of Trust; your name is on it. You’ve already paid for your house. It was paid for in full before you even signed the papers at escrow, and you didn’t even know it; nor was it disclosed to you.



The Promissory Note

The promissory note starts out referring to you as the Borrower. It talks about the borrower’s promise to pay. Following those words, it says, “In return for a loan that I have received.” After that it says, “I promise to pay,” and then the exact dollar figure is listed. Then the Promissory Note mentions the installment payments and interest. Then the Note says, “In return for a loan that I have received.” Then a date is listed on that note.

The question is: When you went to the title company or escrow office and signed all the documents for your mortgage, had you already received a “loan”? That’s an important question. The note that you signed says at the very top, “In return for a loan that I have received.” What this is telling you is that you received a loan sometime before the date that you signed the note.

Let’s say that you signed the note on February 12, 2004. What the words, “In return for a loan that I have received,” really means that at some time before February 12, 2004, I received a loan.

The fact is, you did not actually receive a loan before that date; matter of fact, you never received ANY kind of a loan at all…at any time! There was no loan received or provided you. This whole “loaning you money to buy a house” is a complete and total fraud.



There never was a REAL loan…

The fact is, you did not receive a loan before the date that you signed a note. You didn’t see a cashier’s check in the mail a few days before you went and signed these papers, did you? You didn’t get any kind of an electronic transfer into your checking account before you signed either!

When we go to the title company and sign the mortgage documents, we see the words at the top of the note, “In return for a loan that I have received,” we might think, “I’ll sign this and after I sign it, I guess I have received a loan.” But that is not what the document says.

If there is ever a legal controversy concerning whether you actually received a loan prior to signing or assumed you received a loan at the time of the signing; which side will win, the side that argues their assumptions or the side that argues the “exact words” on the pages you signed? You know the answer to that. It’s the words on the document that will win.

When we see a document that states, “In return for a loan that I have received,” and we know for a fact that no loan was received, something odd is going on. When it says, “have received” in the past tense, as though a past event has already occurred (by the date you’re signing the note), we know that it has a meaning. Everything in legal terms and legalese means something.

The meaning of the words “have received” is that some event already happened. If you know that it didn’t happen, something is wrong. Somebody is not telling the truth. Who is not telling the truth?

As you take a close look at the note, something very interesting is taking place. Did you know that YOU created that note? Did you know that you created the deed of trust?

If you closely examine the wording on the note and the deed of trust, it will begin to make sense to you. It says, “I will do this. I will do that. In return for a loan that I have received, I promise to pay. I understand this. I will do this, etc…” as it proceeds through the note.

You realize that these are statements that they have printed out for you, but you are the one who is signing the documents, so it looks like you have produced and provided these statements to them. In signing these documents you assert that, “in return for a loan that I received”, it looks like they are tricking you into signing a statement that isn’t true. You might think, “Hey, they are making me sign a statement that isn’t true, it’s a lie.” By doing this, the bank is putting that lie that you’ve received a loan into your mouth. You are the one signing it and saying it, and that gives them the privilege to say, “The borrower says and agrees that they’ve received a loan, so we’ll proceed on the basis of what they said and signed to. They signed the papers saying they’ve received a loan. We’ll go ahead and behave as though they did receive it, and we’ll require them to make payments.”

That is not a fair transaction when no loan was provided to you in the transaction. No money was actually provided to you as a loan. In return for not providing a loan to you, you have to pay the bank a payment every month for the next 30 years.



But the seller got paid money right? Where did the money come from?

The next question that comes into play is, “If no loan was provided, where did the money come from to pay the seller of the house? The guy I bought the house from got paid. Where did the money come from?”

This is where the whole “loan process” gets interesting. I’ll compare what happens in a normal real estate transaction with an analogy.

Let’s say that I advertise my car for sale. I’m still driving my 1999 Honda Civic, even though it has 120,000 miles on it. You know about Hondas, they run for a long time. So, I put it on Craigslist for $2,400, hoping that I can sell it for at least $2,000.

You see it advertised. You come over and take a good look at the Honda. You offer me $2,000. So, I say, “That sounds great. We have a deal.” You tell me that you would like to pay by check, “Is that a deal?” I say, “Sure, I understand. People don’t walk around with $2,000 cash all the time. You can write me a check.”

However, I’m not going to let you take the car until the check clears.” You say, “That’s fine.”

We agree. We have a deal. You write me the check, I give you a receipt, and that protects your side of the deal. I take that check. I deposit it into my account. I draw some funds off of it. The rest of it, I leave in my account.

Within a couple of days, you check your bank account online. You see that there is $2,000 less in your bank account. Furthermore, I can see that there is $2,000 more in my bank account. Your check has cleared. That means you’re going to come and knock on my door. We both acknowledge that the check has cleared. You say to me that it’s time for you to take the car and the title.

But I say to you, “All right, I’ll give you the keys to the car, but I’ve decided to change the deal. I’m not going to transfer the title over to you. You can take possession, but I’m not going to actually give you the title to the car until you pay me $45 a month for the next 20 years. How do you like that?”

That’s crazy you think, that would never happen to anybody. No one would ever agree to that.

Yet, every day of the week, in thousands of mortgage transactions all over the country, this type of scenario is taking place, where bankers and escrow officers are writing these “loans”, making borrowers enter into these unfair arrangements…with one exception to the car buying scenario and that is “disclosure”.

I disclosed to you when you came to take full possession of the car that we both understood that the payment in “full had been made”. That’s really the only difference between this car sales scenario and when people get into these “mortgage loan” arrangements.

The lender is not disclosing that there actually isn’t any lending going on. They’re not telling you that the note you signed is NOT a promissory note. It is actually a cashier’s check or bank note, when you look at how it is structured.

When you sign your name to the note and hand that over to the lender, this is what happens to the note. The lender takes that note as though it were a cashier’s check or a personal check and deposits that document into their bank account, as if paid in full.

The banks accept these promissory note documents as negotiable instruments and treat them like a cashier’s check or a cash deposit. That promissory note becomes a cash deposit to the bankers who deposit it into their account. It becomes cash to the bankers, and you paid off your house with cash as far as the bank is concerned, by signing that promissory note at escrow.



How the bank treats your note on their records

In this fractional banking system, for every dollar that is on deposit in any particular bank branch, that bank has the ability to issue $10 of credit. Your cash deposit, (the promissory note you signed at escrow), creates an asset they can use.

Think of a $250,000 note that is put on “deposit”. That means $2.5 million to that bank. It’s a great deal for the bank. It’s not a great deal for you.

The bank did not disclose to you that when you came to the escrow table to sign all that paperwork, that “payment in full” was already made by you. You were fooled into issuing to them what you THOUGHT was merely a promise to pay, but they took your promissory note as a payment in FULL. You paid in full!



What arrangement did you agree to under the deed of trust when “payment in full” was made? The bank is supposed to initiate the “reconveyance process”. This is the process whereby the mortgage lien is removed from your title. But they don’t. They don’t tell you that payment in full has been made. That’s another part of the fraud. They’re asking you to pay for that whole mortgage one more time. Again.

We’re not going to go into depth here about how the banks sell the note and get paid all over again or the process called “securitization,” which is another way the entire mortgage obligation gets paid again. When the mortgage note is converted from a plain document that is signed at the beginning of the loan, you think you’re receiving a negotiable instrument, but instead the note is deposited as cash into the lender’s bank account. This means that your promise to pay has been fulfilled. Paid in full!



The proof is in your deed of trust

The proof of what I’m saying is in the language of the deed of trust . It is in black and white. This language is toward the end of the second page.

If you’re in a State that doesn’t have a deed of trust, the document is referred to as a mortgage.

The language I’m referencing starts with “Borrower Covenants.” Those words should be in capital letters. What that says is that the borrower (meaning you) covenants (gives a solemn promise) and can confirm the following fact: The borrower covenants that they are “lawfully seized” of the estate.

What does that mean? “Legally seized”, means “in possession of.”XXXXX You are in full legal possession of the estate, in other words, of this property free and clear of encumbrances.

It further explains that this borrower has the full legal right to convey and/or grant this property to someone else.

I’m not asking you to be a lawyer here. A lot of us probably haven’t gone to law school. This is a very common-sense question. Can you legally give something away that you don’t legally own, even if someone else owns maybe 5% of this thing? Do you have a legal right to give it away? No, of course you don’t.

You have to be legally seized of that piece of property in order to give it away. It is right there in the deed of trust. It says so. It says that you are legally in possession and legally own this property.

Then at that point YOU are choosing to convey it to somebody else, just because the paperwork said to. How are you able to do that if you don’t already own it? My friends, the very simple answer to that question is, you do own it.

How is it that you own it? You own it because just five minutes before, you signed a piece of paper called a note. The note was accepted as payment in full. The following papers prove it. In this signing process, that the note is signed first, and then later on the deed of trust is signed. That very precise order of things is very important, and it’s always the case.

You first pay for the property with the note. At that moment you are the full, free-and-clear property owner.

That paragraph proceeds to say that it is unencumbered. You own it. Having become the owner by your payment in full, you now are the authorized owner. You now have the ability to give the darn thing away, which you go right ahead and do.

This is all happening because you don’t know it is happening. You don’t know that you fully own the property free and clear. This is where they get us. This is how they’re able to basically steal people’s property.

They have us sign a piece of paper that we do not know is being treated as cash. We also don’t know that it was accepted as payment in full. We don’t really know that we own the darn thing free and clear and that what we’re doing is giving it away.

Within about a five-minute period of time, we come into full possession of a property and then we give it away, not knowing that that whole thing took place.

If you’re not angry about all of this, then you probably shouldn’t even be continuing to review this material. You’ve got to believe what I’m telling you, first of all, for you to genuinely be angry about it. I’m just going with the presumption that if you have made it to this point of studying, you’ve already accepted a lot of the things you’ve already learned, and this is just another piece of the puzzle. Hopefully a lot of it makes sense to you this far. Be patient however, it may take a little more paradigm shifting to fully get it.



Is this working to stop foreclosures and convert properties to free and clear properties? 100’s if not thousands of time, before we started teaching this more advanced process.

Now that this fraud has been brought forward and we know what it is, how are the trustees’ offices that are setting up doing foreclosure sales accepting the information in order to stop the seizing of the land away from the actual owner? Are sales being stopped?

They are being stopped. The first reason they’re being stopped is because the trustee in the case of the foreclosure has been fired. The contract, whatever contract that it was, has been revoked. It’s been cut off, thanks to the process we put them through, and they have a full opportunity to stop it. We are back in the driver’s seat.



What are we claiming?

Are we bringing forward a breach of contract? No, not really, but that is one of the things that you are certainly bringing to light. It’s very important to let the other side know what YOU know. They count on you NOT knowing what you now know. This is a big, important piece of the puzzle that protects you from them proceeding to stop you.

They assume that you’re ignorant, which is what gets this whole thing going in the first place. It’s your ignorance of the true nature of the transaction. If they sense that you don’t really know what you’re doing, of course they’re going to proceed with a foreclosure or collection, or assume their contract is in effect.

You give them enough information that indicates that you know you have the right, because you are the trustor of the trust, warranty deed, mortgage or whatever it is in the state where you reside. You’re the one who created that document, and you are the one who made the initial assignments and appointments that got this whole system going the in first place.

Thanks to this process, we establish through the bank’s own permission, due to their non response to our notices, that you still have that power. We now have a new contract which indicates their understanding that you have the power to appoint someone. You have the power to revoke their appointment. That is, in general terms, the process that we follow. We revoke the appointments that have been made that set up their authority to do a foreclosure or make a payoff claim in the first place.

If you have revoked them and stripped them of the fraudulent authority, they have no documentation to rely upon if this actually ends up in front of a judge. In fact our documentation will give you that power, which they will not want to challenge once established. They do not want that situation.

First of all, they don’t want this to be judicial (in court). What you’re doing by preparing yourself is having a file full of all of the things you’ve done, just in case you ever have to present this to a judge.

Let me just assure you, if you’ve done all the steps properly and properly informed the other side of what you actually know and what you’re prepared to do to defend your property, you won’t ever have to take this in front of a judge. As indicated, we even give them notice and opportunity to deny it, which further bolsters our evidence.

I don’t want you to be afraid or think, ―This might end up in a court situation. I don’t know what to say. I don’t know how to defend myself.‖ Don’t worry. If you do everything properly, you will never have to find yourself in that scenario.



How do you prove that you paid? Do you subpoena them for their records?

We suggest that each user of our system submit an ―affidavit of fact‖ asserting that payment in full was made. That makes them have to prove that it isn’t true. The only way to rebut an affidavit is to provide your own affidavit, point by point. Those are the rules.

If they haven’t provided an affidavit to overcome the one that you’ve provided, then under law they are essentially agreeing with what you’ve said. ―Silence is acquiescence‖, is the legal rule on that. There comes a point in our process, where if you’ve done all the right things, they have to listen. They essentially do obey. You are the one driving now.

The bank knows that proceeding forward and just ignoring you could actually mean criminal charges to the human beings that are taking these steps. There are consequences to engaging in fraud, if the victim of it knows what’s happening to them.

On top of that we even offer to pay them ―funds held in escrow‖, by creating a qualified a promissory note and having it held by an escrow agent. We say ―come and get it‖, but bring your proof first. If they don’t show and deny payment, that is also indication of a fraud and denial of payment. We give them so many ways to comply, that we overwhelm any legal argument in our favor.



How is our social security number involved in this?

The reason we share our social security number with financial institutions who are not our employers, is because it is going in reverse in these cases. They are drawing funds. They are not our employers. These people won’t be taking 6% or 7% from our paycheck and putting it into our social security account.

The funds that are drawn from our signature actually come from a shadow account that’s kept in our ALL CAPS NAME with the Treasury Department.

We individuals are the ―originator of all credit‖ in this country. When we as the authorized agents for those accounts sign our name, what we’re doing is authorizing that account with the Treasury to be taxed.

That makes us the ―originator‖ of these funds. Just as if we printed real money. It is accounted for that way in our all electronic banking system. That makes us the originator of the loan, whether it’s a credit card, an auto loan or any of these things.

If we are the originator, then the other side of the transaction, the other party, they’re not providing anything. That alone makes it an ―unconscionable contract‖. In other words, there is no consideration. They bring nothing to the table.

If you provide the funds and they don’t, then what are they providing? Nothing!

Forget the fact that the note you signed doesn’t have another signature other than yours. Forget the fact that the deed of trust doesn’t have another signature other than yours. The fact that you are the originator of the funds means that you don’t owe anybody anything. You already PAID IT.



How your signature works

If you look carefully at your deed of trust, you’ll find that there is no other signature, only yours. Look at the end of the note and you’ll find that there is no other signature, only yours.

When you write a check, when you buy your groceries or pay your power bill, do you have some representative at the grocery store also sign the check? Of course you don’t. Do you have an associate at the power company also sign the check? Of course you don’t.

It’s the same with the note. You’re basically signing a check. Because you’re signing a check, a negotiable instrument, there doesn’t need to be another party signing it. You sign it. You say, ―Here’s payment.‖ They receive and deposit it. It’s money to them. It all gets balanced out through electronic shifting of numbers later, all stemming from your Treasury ledger.

That is the main reason right there why you have every right to free-and-clear title of your property. You paid it entirely. The entire obligation is satisfied.

We keep coming back to the fact that the only way that this ―lender‖ could be given the property is if whoever gave it to them had the right to give it to them. The only way you have the right to give it to them is if you own it free and clear.

There must have been some mechanism by which you became that free-and-clear owner. The only mechanism that there can possibly be is if you paid for it, entirely, and if that payment was accepted as payment in full. It was.

One thing we have to remember here is that WE are actually the lender in these cases.



How may this affect credit?

It shouldn’t affect it negatively at all. The way these settled cases are showing up on the credit report is ―obligation satisfied.‖ It takes 90 days to accurately reflect the evidence that you are the free-and-clear title holder on all the various records.



What about previously auctioned properties?

I’m very confident that it can be won because what we’re talking about is a transaction. It was way back at the transaction stage, that it started out as a fraud. The courts have settled this question very firmly. Fraud vitiates a contract. However it gets quite complex when another buyer has moved in already.

In this case, there is not a valid contract from the get-go. All we need to do is document that and begin to file the appropriate claims and public notices on that property with the county recorder.

This whole arrangement wasn’t come up with by accident. It’s not a clerical error. It was invented very purposely to receive two, three, four and five times the amount of the note through the machinations that are involved in what happens with the note, the buying, selling and trading of it.

You throw a monkey wrench in that process and they’ll basically tell you, ―We’re not going to work with you. If you’re not going to sign all the papers right now, then we don’t have a deal.‖

I say that as long as you know what you’re entering into and as long as you know what your rights are, why not? I say get yourself in as many of these ―mortgages loans‖ as you possibly can. This can help you have free-and-clear title to those properties within a two or three-month time period. No one is losing, because these lenders are considered having been paid, they are not losing money. Your note paid them already.

There is some opportunity here. Start thinking creatively. We can show you how to acquire properties while everyone can win.



You are the creator of all credit and notes – why is that important?

You are the creator of that trust. You’re the trustor/grantor. Those two words are synonymous. They mean the same thing. In some states it’s grantor and in other states it is trustor, but it means the same thing. You’re the one who created that trust. You created that document. They simply printed it out.

So here is our process after completing Phase 1(the response to their payoff, and your submission of a note to come and get as payoff):

First, you revoke the power of attorney. Once that’s been done and you’ve filed notice with the county to make it public record (record it) that you have taken your voice back and hold the power of attorney.

Then you revoke the trustee. Then you revoke the beneficiary. Then you revoke the lender (and their liens). You revoke all of those relationships because you have the right to do so, thanks to the agreement formed in Phase 1 of our system. But the final process starts with the power of attorney. I just wanted to emphasize that.

The follow up enforcement process is only done if necessary, but you now have a strong case if they fight you. Your evidence is much stronger than theirs, due to this process and due to the fact they allowed every step of this indicating their approval.





“LEGAL” RULES AND TERMINOLOGY OF MORTGAGE SETTLEMENT



Here are some rules to consider when you’re doing this process. Remember, this process is not so much about perfection. It’s not about trickery or anything like that. It’s about certain rules of law which have been used and exercised over the years. We’re just exercising them in this arena based upon the circumstances we’re seeing out there in the mortgage market.

You may have read some of the recent articles we just published on the website. Many articles are emerging about the MERS System and the flaws in the entire mortgage portfolio system on the market. The Treasury is having concerns with this as well; as they should. They’re having a difficult time tracking all these mortgages (copies) and finding the original notes. Courts are agreeing in most cases, that the banks need the original notes to prove the very existence of a ―claim‖ for a debt owed.

There are some courts that have ruled for or against this argument as well, on its own. But ultimately and fortunately, that’s not our only argument with this system. I just had a discussion with an industry expert attorney recently. He said, ―Even though one court may have ruled that banks don’t need the original note to have a claim, that’s simply not true in all cases. Here’s the problem. If you come at them with a slightly different argument and evidence, it’s a new ruling. This mortgage process system does not rely on that one argument alone. So those rulings may not apply. So our program likely does not apply to that ruling’’. That’s what he told me.



RULES OF CONTRACTS WE APPLY

Let’s talk about some of the basic rules of the contracts. If you understand these rules, the documents will make more sense to you. It is important that you go through this prior to going through the documents. As you read the documents, you’ll see that it’s full of this wording.

First of all, for there to be a contract, there has to be a “meeting of the minds”. This means that the two parties simply understand what the agreement was, whether it’s a handshake or a posted sign like a speed sign on a road.

We enter into contracts dozens of times a day and don’t even realize it. During our whole lives as debtors in society, we are set up so that we are constantly being entered into contracts. Everywhere we go, we’re paying fees, registering, licensing and agreeing to something. When we simply agree to walk through a store without shoplifting, that equates to a contract.

Look at it as if laws are really contracts in commerce. If you always keep in mind that everything you do is a contract, many things in life will begin to make more sense to you.

Even when the government passes rules, regulations and laws, they are contracts. If you don’t object, you become subject to those laws. You know why they get away with it? First, we voted those representatives in. Two, they assume we won’t argue or stand up against it, even if what they do is unconstitutional. I believe congress passes many unconstitutional laws, but if we don’t stand up, they get away with it. Silence is acquiescence.

Recently the healthcare bill was being put through, and suddenly millions of people stood up all over the country and said, ―Time out! What is this really all about? It’s not about healthcare. It’s about a socialistic empire that you’re installing here.‖ It had an effect.

People were very concerned about the big-government nature of this move. There are several of these huge spending measures being shoved through right now. What does it really mean? If we don’t speak up, they get away with it.

Hidden inside the documentation of these big bills are actually contracts. If we don’t argue against them, we agree with them. Therefore, they become law or at least what we call law. It is a contract we did not disagree with.

Everything we do in life is a contract. Even when going into court, it is again actually about contracts. Once you answer that judge with who you are and plead something, you’ve entered into a contract and you’re a subject of that court.

Another concept to understand is silence. If you clearly let someone know and give them ample warning on the issue or you notify them of certain things and they don’t dispute those claims, then their silence is an agreement with those claims. You need to clearly prove that they were notified properly and understood the nature of those statements.



Our mortgage and debt documents do that process as well. The ―silence is acquiescence‖ concept is definitely part of what we do.

Persistence is a very important part of what we teach. You have to be a very persistent person to get through some phases of this process.

I’ve already seen people who don’t actually review the basis and background of what we do, and simply dismiss this process ―is a scam‖. We are carefully following what we believe to be a legal process, not re-inventing anything here. How we apply it, however, is unique.

An incomplete response is not a response. For example, you sent a letter out and there appears to be a response to that letter. But if you actually look at the original letter we send, it outlines what a correct and complete response is, and that anything less is no response at all… a partial response is not a response. It is still silence.

Unless it is a specific, exact response, it is not a response. It is a diversion. It is a ―curveball‖ response. The other party wants to see if you’ll quit at that point. So persistence and demanding exact complete responses are essential to your success.

What they’re doing is playing football with you. They’re hitting you every now and then with ―something‖. They’re going to see if you won’t make it through to the final two

minutes of the fourth quarter. They’ll try to get you to quit in the final two minutes too. It might be through intimidation, diversion or statements they make, all of which can invoke fear.



Persistence is what will get you through this. No matter what happens, go to the next step. That’s critically important.

That is where people succeed or fail with this process. They get caught up in it and don’t realize that they have to go ALL THE WAY from Point A to Point Z, not Point A to Point G. That is really what it will take.

It may sound difficult, but it’s worth it. That’s what you’ve all decided by becoming part of this. You can win if you don’t quit.



Fraud Vitiates Contracts

Another concept we need to understand is that Fraud Vitiates Contracts. That means that if someone didn’t disclose something in your original agreement. Or as in the case of mortgages, they misused or monetized your note in a certain way, were paid off, and didn’t tell you, it is potentially considered fraud.

If that happens, if you read the language in the documents, it vitiates or eliminates the original contract or, in other words, the mortgage debt. What we’re saying is that’s one more piece of your ammunition to get fair treatment here. Remember, all these things become your ammunition, which you have a right to utilize. Fraud vitiates contracts.

Additionally, if they committed a fraud and they don’t deny it, their silence is essentially admission. Then, when they don’t produce an original contract, we are

granted certain permission, as written in our agreement we sent the bank. That is why we go in and change the power of attorney and the trustee and remove the lien. We have their permission to do so.

If they don’t try to stop this process, even after when we outline how they have committed a fraud, their silence is agreement. They don’t want to go to court with our pile of evidence stacked against them. That’s why we push the process forward. The more steps you take, the more ammunition you have if they ever do try to get you into court.



What is a CLAIM?

A claim is when somebody says, ―We have an agreement‖ and I have original proof with a witness or contract‖.

Here is the nature and form of the mortgage agreement. It was a note, assuming they gave you real money. Oh really? Let’s see. Did you give me money? Why don’t you show me proof of that PLUS show me the original note (you actually claim)? If they don’t show up with the original note, they can’t prove their claim.

I had a discussion with a very powerful attorney in this field recently on this. As I told him our position, he shook his head. He said, ―Absolutely, if you cannot prove claim, you don’t have a case.‖ Lawyers can go in and argue this all they want, but if they keep it simple, the simple fact is that lack of proof of claim means there is no claim. There is no contract. There is no contract for you to pay back something on a piece of paper that you created out of thin air‖.