Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Fighting a Foreclosure

Expand Messages
  • mn_chicago
    Wednesday 4 July 2007 [There is a lot of information below, but it all has substance as I pursued the alleged original lender to prove it loaned anything to
    Message 1 of 15 , Jul 4, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      Wednesday 4 July 2007

      [There is a lot of information below, but it all has
      substance as I pursued the alleged original lender to
      prove it loaned anything to me.]

      Yesterday, I received a motion for substitution of parties.

      The plaintiff has bowed out in favor of the "original
      lender" who was assigned the mortgage and note back to it.

      Illinois statutes allow for substitution of parties for
      any reason.

      Has anyone had experience with subtitution that requires
      one to show up for what seems a perfunctory procedure? I
      thought about going to object on the basis that the
      original plaintiff never had to prove the holder in due
      course status it claimed, for it never presented anything
      that was verified, nor was a note ever a part of the
      complaint.

      Two months ago, I began working as an independent contractor,
      and my hours start at 4 a.m., and I do not get home much
      before 6 or 7 p.m., so my time availability is quite limited.
      If my presence is not really required or needed, I prefer to
      not show up and focus on the main fight.

      Also, the plaintiff responded to my request to admit questions
      allowed per supreme court rule and objected to each question
      on the basis that "Matters in the dispute have been resolved
      as a judgment of foreclosure was entered in favor of plaintiff.
      The request is not in proper form as it poses a question and
      not a statement of fact or request for admission of
      genuinesness of a specific document."

      Well, the summary judgment was not accepted by the judge who
      was not the one who "granted" it.

      The "original lender," soon to be the substitute plaintiff
      has received a slew of challenges from me from the onset
      of the alleged mortgage and note over a 5 month period.


      This is what I have done with the "original lender soon to
      be plaintiff:"

      To the president of the "original lender," I sent:

      * NOTICE OF ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF DUE PERFORMANCE, with a
      supporting affidavit, followed up by a protest of dishonor
      through a notary, recognized as an offcer in the state of
      Illinois and recognized by the Law of Nations.

      *Notice for Verification per UCC 3-505.4 requiring

      a. Exhibition of original note

      b. reasonable idetification of the person making
      presentment and evidence of authority to make it

      c. That the original instruments be produced for
      acceptance of payment at any place reasonable.

      wherein I stated that the allged lender is not the
      holder in due course and may have breached the agreement,
      AND that I was the original lender.

      Notarial Notice of Dishonor.

      No response.

      ---

      To the Senior Department Manager:

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR FULL DISCLOSURE, to include
      over 50 questions demanding very specific answers to
      questions about the account procedures for the entire
      transaction.

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND TO CEASE AND DESIST COLLECTION
      ACTIVITIES PRIOR TO VALIDATION OF PURPORTED DEBT
      with over 40 specific request for answers.

      Notarial Notice of Dishonor.

      No response

      ---

      To the Director of Internal Audit:

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR INSPECTION OF ORIGINAL NOTE

      *NOTICE of ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF DUE PERFORMANCE

      *DEMAND FOR RETURN OF DEPOSIT OF MY PROMISSORY NOTE

      Notarial Notice of Dishonor.

      No response.

      ---

      To the Director of Operations:

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND FOR INSPECTION OF ORIGINAL NOTE

      *NOTICE OF ADEQUATE ASSURANCE OF DUE PERFORMANCE,
      including many specific questions about the loan,
      accounting procedures, return of deposit of promissory
      note, etc.

      Notarial Notice of Dishonor.

      No response.

      ---

      To the Vice President:

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND to send a closing statement to
      discharge the aleged debt, with my offer to discharge
      the alleged loan in cash, provided that the original,
      unaltered promissory note be presented at time of
      payment

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND to respond to my assertion that
      "lender" has violated all the elements of the loan
      agreement, thus breaching the agreement.

      *NOTICE AND DEMAND for proof that "lender" used its
      own source of funds, along with a request and
      confirmation of terms and cnditions of the original note.

      *Notarial Notice of Dishonor

      No response.

      ---

      Note that my demands included between 30 to 50 very
      specific questions, each Notice accompanied by an
      affidavit.

      In one of the affidavits, I stated that I was the actual
      lender and holder in due course, and I gave the "lender"
      ten days to refute.

      No response.

      ---

      It would seem that I should be able to use all of these
      unanswered Notice and Demands for specific answers, along
      with unrebutted affidavits against the "lender" as it
      becomes the new plaintiff.

      Feedback is appreciated.


      Thanks,

      mn
    • mn_chicago
      Saturday 7 July 2007 I decided to go to court to object to a substitution of plaintiff on grounds that first alleged plaintiff has not proven itself as holder
      Message 2 of 15 , Jul 7, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        Saturday 7 July 2007

        I decided to go to court to object to a substitution
        of plaintiff on grounds that first alleged plaintiff
        has not proven itself as holder in due course as is
        claimed. and cannot meet the statutory requirements
        as filed in the original, unchanged complaint.

        It occurred to me, after my momentary "panic" of how
        to proceed procedurually, that nothing is perfunctory
        or innocuous from the opposition. I also realized I
        would be waiving rights by allowing the switch to go
        unopposed.

        It also presents me the opportunity to renew my
        objection to subject matter jurisdiction, as well, as
        not being proven on the record, despite the judge's
        say so, which is insufficient in law.

        The judge is working me by ignoring my demands and
        "focusing" on one issue. I need to learn to be more
        forceful in objecting to everything...a lesson for
        anyone else going in front of a judge to be prepared
        to be objectionable, as it were, and assert one's
        position.

        It was suggested that I file a copy of all my Notice
        and Demands to original alleged lender, soon to be new
        plaintiff. I will also look up to see if estoppel
        applies to any of my ignored Notice and Demands, with
        affidavits. U S v Twill comes to mind again.

        Cheers!

        mn
      • mn_chicago
        While U s v Twill came to mind, it is actually: U. S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977) I stand corrected. mn
        Message 3 of 15 , Jul 7, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          While U s v Twill came to mind, it is actually:

          U. S. v. Tweel, 550 F.2d 297, 299 (1977)

          I stand corrected.

          mn
        • mn_chicago
          Monday 9 July 2007 It was wrong of me to vascillate and wonder if I should go to court for what seemed like a perfuntory procedure, a substitution of parties.
          Message 4 of 15 , Jul 9, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Monday 9 July 2007

            It was wrong of me to vascillate and wonder if I should
            go to court for what seemed like a perfuntory procedure,
            a substitution of parties. I went this morning.


            The complaint to foreclose was filed on 19 January 2007.

            The alleged plaintiff filed using only the mortgage as
            "evidence" to foreclose....no note was filed.

            In preparing for this morning's session, I reviewed the
            assignment of mortgages which I just received a few days
            ago in the plaintiff's amended summary judgment.

            The first assignment was the mortgage from MERS to the
            plaintiff. It is dated 1 February 2007, 22 days AFTER
            the complaint was filed.

            So the plaintiff did not have the mortgage under which it
            filed properly assigned to it until after filing the
            complaint.

            The second exhibit was the plaintiff assigning the mortgage
            and note back to the original alleged lender. That assignment
            is dated 15 June 2007, four days before the amended summary
            judgment.

            BUT, in reading the last paragraph of that assignment, it
            states that the assignment of the mortgage and noted was in
            effect ON OR BEFORE 10 JANUARY 2007!

            In the first instance, the plaintiff was not assigned the
            mortgage until AFTER it filed the complaint.

            In the second instance, the plaintiff assigned the note
            and mortgage to another "lender" by 10 January 2007, nine
            days before it filed the complaint, and 21 days before it
            was assigned the mortgage!

            The first words out of my mouth to the judge were to demand an
            immediate dismissal of the case for lack of proper standing
            and fraud upon the court.

            I stated I have an unrebutted affidavit on record that there
            was no proper party plaintiff, and no fact evidence on the
            record.

            The judge noted my objection, but allowed the substitution
            of parties because that was the motion to be heard. My
            demand for immediate dismissal would be appropriate for my
            response to the summary judgment, she said.

            I asked, could I not object to allowing the substitution
            because of faulty assignments?, and she said no.
            [That was my effort to ask questions, per FF]. I could
            take that issue up in my response to the amended summary
            judgment.

            Now I have a month to respond, and the new plaintiff gets
            14 days to respond back, and then back to court in late
            August.

            ---

            I had just read a case cite the previous Saturday that I
            thought was appropriate but did not write it down at the
            time. I immediately went to the library on the next floor
            and there it was:

            "A court should of its own volition, and without any motion
            dismiss a suit at any time when its attention is called to
            the fact that such suit is being prosecuted without proper
            authority." Town of Kankakee v K & I RR CO, 115 Ill 88

            Some of you may be able to learn from my mistakes and see
            what to expect when in a courtroom situation.

            One thing is apparent: I am making headway. The summary
            judgment against me by a substitute judge was vacated, and
            I have the opportunity to shoot down the plaintiff in a few
            ways that violate the statutes under which it files, and
            now, the improper order of assignments.

            Cheers!

            mn

            Moderator/Bear: I would put that authority from Kankakee into a "renewed" demand to dismiss in writing and file it pronto. Try to make the word "should" stand out. Maybe you could make "should" stand out by way of related cases that put emphasis on what the court is supposed to do. You should be able to find some related authority that you should not have to expend resources to defend a suit brought without authority. Include your new exhibits regarding the history of assignments with a discussion in the motion about why they are relevant. Put in a separate motion to hold the plaintiffs in contempt of court for the fraud on the court. Also, look into a separate motion for Rule 11 sanctions as the suit is not warranted if they had made a reasonable investigation into the law and the facts entitling you to sanctions.
          • mn_chicago
            Sunday 23 December 2007 An update on my efforts to ward off a foreclosure judgment, now in the appellate court. A few weeks ago, I was Noticed by a new firm
            Message 5 of 15 , Dec 23, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              Sunday 23 December 2007

              An update on my efforts to ward off a foreclosure
              judgment, now in the appellate court.

              A few weeks ago, I was Noticed by a new firm that
              it was taking over the case. Guess the "lender"
              recognized that the local foreclosure-mill firm was
              out of their league beyond the routine, so they
              stepped it up a few notches to a firm with offices
              around the country.

              This time, I am fighting back from the onset by
              sending out a subpeona ducus tecum to the two that
              claim to be licensed to practice law in Illinois.
              Because a notice was mentioned as being sent to
              the initial "attorney" this new firm is replacing,
              I sent a subpoena to him, as well, (I figure, they
              opened the door for it), demanding that they all
              produce a license to practice law, with the oath
              of office certified and inscribed on the license,
              as prescibed by law, and that the firm they are with
              is also in compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules.

              Now lets see how the judge tries to deal with this
              approach.

              Cheers,

              mn


              Let me add, while preparing my appeal for a guilty
              verdict on a moving traffic violation, I noticed
              that my reasoning for having that judgment dismissed
              also applied to the foreclosure appeal.

              Making objections is key for any appeal, (and I am
              on the record for making them), for without
              objections on the record, the reviewing court has
              nothing to review...

              ...unless one can bring in the plain error doctrine
              where the judge's behavior/ruling is so egregious that
              it could deteriorate judicial integrity. Then, it is
              not necessary that any objection appear on the record.

              My point?

              Never give up. Be aware of the plain error doctrine for
              your own state, in case you ever need it.

              I tried to schedule the court date for the subpeona for
              the 19th of January, the one year anniversary from when
              my case was filed, but it falls on a weekend. I doubt
              the other side would have noted my irony.
            • Frog Farmer
              ... Flabby couldn t cut the mustard! ... There will come a day when these losers realize their error, but it isn t soon. ... Could you post the Illinois law
              Message 6 of 15 , Dec 24, 2007
              • 0 Attachment
                mn_chicago wrote:

                > A few weeks ago, I was Noticed by a new firm

                Flabby couldn't cut the mustard!

                > that
                > it was taking over the case. Guess the "lender"
                > recognized that the local foreclosure-mill firm was
                > out of their league beyond the routine, so they
                > stepped it up a few notches to a firm with offices
                > around the country.

                There will come a day when these "losers" realize their error, but it
                isn't soon.

                > This time, I am fighting back from the onset by
                > sending out a subpeona ducus tecum to the two that
                > claim to be licensed to practice law in Illinois.
                > Because a notice was mentioned as being sent to
                > the initial "attorney" this new firm is replacing,
                > I sent a subpoena to him, as well, (I figure, they
                > opened the door for it), demanding that they all
                > produce a license to practice law, with the oath
                > of office certified and inscribed on the license,
                > as prescribed by law, and that the firm they are with
                > is also in compliance with Illinois Supreme Court Rules.

                Could you post the Illinois law that requires that the oath be ON the
                license? Here in California it is Business & Professions Code Section
                6067. I've told many people of this law but few choose to use it. I
                have used it, and it is fun to use, because these attorneys just stand
                and stammer at you - they don't have any excuse for the ignorance you
                suddenly illuminate. I once "won" a whole bunch of "valuable prizes" at
                a seminar where a supposed attorney was charging for and giving "trust"
                advice. I expanded my booty by telling him my own interpretation of his
                published words in his invitation, and I interpreted his words in my
                favor and not his and demanded satisfaction, with witnesses of course,
                and after I told him about 6067, I got all I wanted and MORE (when I
                threw in a promise to forget all prior transgressions once I was
                satisfied there and then)!

                > Now lets see how the judge tries to deal with this
                > approach.

                I hate leaving outcomes up to them!

                > Making objections is key for any appeal, (and I am
                > on the record for making them), for without
                > objections on the record, the reviewing court has
                > nothing to review...

                That should be capitalized, or a text file with just that fact should be
                put in this list's file section for people to find, because it seems
                that many people don't realize it and then just waste more time and
                resources on an appeal that could never have won in the first place,
                without a snowball's chance where users of the word that sounds like
                gawd are going!

                > ...unless one can bring in the plain error doctrine
                > where the judge's behavior/ruling is so egregious that
                > it could deteriorate judicial integrity. Then, it is
                > not necessary that any objection appear on the record.

                I don't like relying upon that "plain error doctrine" for this reason:
                what should already be plain to Americans, like things that are plain to
                maybe you and me, are not plain at all. Americans as a whole are
                unconscious donkeys to permit what was once the best country in the
                world to fall so low so fast without much resistance. As a whole,
                Americans (and I am one) disgust me! I wouldn't trust a consensus from
                a herd of donkeys (now genetically modified with lemming chromosomes)
                for any decision I was going to make. So, I assume it is always me
                against everyone else, and I let my allies show themselves and make
                themselves plain to me; I do not assume they are out there anymore to
                confirm that the errors I point out are "plain error". Maybe they used
                to be there when people read more. But I would not bet a nickel they'd
                be there now, in my own case, when I need reason logic and common sense
                to prevail.

                > My point?
                >
                > Never give up. Be aware of the plain error doctrine for
                > your own state, in case you ever need it.

                Right, never give up. And throw in the kitchen sink if you think it will
                guarantee the outcome you prefer. Do whatever is possible to save the
                day! I once saw a picture titled "Never Give Up!" It showed a frog
                about to be swallowed by a heron, but the frog was choking his neck
                making it impossible. You do what you have to do.

                My first case, where I had set out to get prosecuted just to get
                courtroom experience (which maybe was a dumb move looking back; I still
                haven't decided because of the cheap education) I typed with no computer
                available and produced over an inch and a half of paperwork over nine
                months and nine hearings! The kitchen sink was in there! But later, for
                my next performance, I worked without a net and reduced my efforts to
                only one hearing and ten pages for a similar win. I guess I'm saying,
                if you are in doubt do everything, but later, when you know the game,
                you can just nail all the free throws.

                > I tried to schedule the court date for the subpeona for
                > the 19th of January, the one year anniversary from when
                > my case was filed, but it falls on a weekend. I doubt
                > the other side would have noted my irony.

                Maybe they'd "get" April 19th.

                Regards,

                FF
              • Michael Noonan
                ... Of particular interest for you is 205/5, at the end: Illinois Compiled Statutes (705 ILCS 205/1) (from Ch. 13, par. 1) Sec. 1. No person shall be permitted
                Message 7 of 15 , Dec 25, 2007
                • 0 Attachment
                  --- Frog Farmer <frogfrmr@...> wrote:

                  >
                  > Could you post the Illinois law that requires that
                  > the oath be ON the license? Here in California it
                  >is Business & Professions Code Section 6067.

                  Of particular interest for you is 205/5, at the end:

                  Illinois Compiled Statutes

                  (705 ILCS 205/1) (from Ch. 13, par. 1)
                  Sec. 1. No person shall be permitted to practice
                  as an attorney or counselor at law within this State
                  without having previously obtained a license for that
                  purpose from the Supreme Court of this State.
                  No person shall receive any compensation directly
                  or indirectly for any legal services other than a
                  regularly licensed attorney, nor may an unlicensed
                  person advertise or hold himself or herself out to
                  provide legal services.
                  A license, as provided for herein, constitutes the
                  person receiving the same an attorney and counselor at
                  law, according to the law and customs thereof, for and
                  during his good behavior in the practice and
                  authorizes him to demand and receive fees for any
                  services which he may render as an attorney and
                  counselor at law in this State. No person shall be
                  granted a license or renewal authorized by this Act
                  who has defaulted on an educational loan guaranteed by
                  the Illinois Student Assistance Commission; however, a
                  license or renewal may be issued to the aforementioned
                  persons who have established a satisfactory repayment
                  record as determined by the Illinois Student
                  Assistance Commission. No person shall be granted a
                  license or renewal authorized by this Act who is more
                  than 30 days delinquent in complying with a child
                  support order; a license or renewal may be issued,
                  however, if the person has established a satisfactory
                  repayment record as determined (i) by the Department
                  of Healthcare and Family Services (formerly Illinois
                  Department of Public Aid) for cases being enforced
                  under Article X of the Illinois Public Aid Code or
                  (ii) in all other cases by order of court or by
                  written agreement between the custodial parent and non
                  custodial parent. No person shall be refused a license
                  under this Act on account of sex.
                  Any person practicing, charging or receiving fees
                  for legal services or advertising or holding himself
                  or herself out to provide legal services within this
                  State, either directly or indirectly, without being
                  licensed to practice as herein required, is guilty of
                  contempt of court and shall be punished accordingly,
                  upon complaint being filed in any Circuit Court of
                  this State. The remedies available include, but are
                  not limited to: (i) appropriate equitable relief; (ii)
                  a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000, which shall be
                  paid to the Illinois Equal Justice Foundation; and
                  (iii) actual damages. Such proceedings shall be
                  conducted in the Courts of the respective counties
                  where the alleged contempt has been committed in the
                  same manner as in cases of indirect contempt and with
                  the right of review by the parties thereto.
                  The provisions of this Act shall be in addition to
                  other remedies permitted by law and shall not be
                  construed to deprive courts of this State of their
                  inherent right to punish for contempt or to restrain
                  the unauthorized practice of law.
                  Nothing in this Act shall be construed to conflict
                  with, amend, or modify Section 5 of the Corporation
                  Practice of Law Prohibition Act or prohibit
                  representation of a party by a person who is not an
                  attorney in a proceeding before either panel of the
                  Illinois Labor Relations Board under the Illinois
                  Public Labor Relations Act, as now or hereafter
                  amended, the Illinois Educational Labor Relations
                  Board under the Illinois Educational Labor Relations
                  Act, as now or hereafter amended, the State Civil
                  Service Commission, the local Civil Service
                  Commissions, or the University Civil Service Merit
                  Board, to the extent allowed pursuant to rules and
                  regulations promulgated by those Boards and
                  Commissions or the giving of information, training, or
                  advocacy or assistance in any meetings or
                  administrative proceedings held pursuant to the
                  federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,
                  the federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the federal
                  Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, or the
                  federal Social Security Act, to the extent allowed by
                  those laws or the federal regulations or State
                  statutes implementing those laws.
                  (Source: P.A. 94 659, eff. 1 1 06; 95 331, eff. 8 21
                  07; 95 410, eff. 8 24 07.)


                  (705 ILCS 205/5) (from Ch. 13, par. 5)
                  Sec. 5. It shall be the duty of the clerk of the
                  supreme court to make and keep a record, stating at
                  the head thereof that the persons whose names are
                  therein written have been regularly licensed and
                  admitted to practice as attorneys and counselors at
                  law within this State, and that they have duly taken
                  the oath of office as prescribed by law, which shall
                  be certified and indorsed on the license.
                  (Source: Laws 1965, p. 34.)


                  Heh, heh.



                  > > Now lets see how the judge tries to deal with this
                  > > approach.
                  >
                  > I hate leaving outcomes up to them!


                  Point taken.


                  > I don't like relying upon that "plain error
                  > doctrine" for this reason: what should already be
                  > plain to Americans, like things that are plain to
                  > maybe you and me, are not plain at all.

                  I am using it for an appeal on a moving violation
                  where no objections on the record, except for lack of
                  proper oath for the issuer of the complaint.

                  For lack of objections on record, this can be the next
                  best approach that I know of, and I fully intend to
                  show how egregious was the behavior of the judge,
                  like when after reading a comparison of the required
                  constitutional oath and the one on file...similar, but
                  not the same, as I pointed out...he laughed and said
                  to me, "You must be kidding!" Then in an aside to
                  his clerk, he said, "It must be a full moon."

                  Should be fun, as you say.



                  > Americans as a whole are unconscious donkeys to
                  > permit what was once the best country in the
                  > world to fall so low so fast without much
                  > resistance.

                  Now THIS is what should be in the files for everyone
                  to read!

                  Kind regards,

                  mn


                  ____________________________________________________________________________________
                  Looking for last minute shopping deals?
                  Find them fast with Yahoo! Search. http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping
                Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.