Foreclosure relief – great for banks; for consumers not so much

Part of an upcoming series to reflect the importance of the http://livingfreeandclear.com

Mortgage Principal Reduction TRIAD program.  We have the answers…

Mark Gimein of Daily Finance makes the following points about why HAMP actually hurts many borrowers while helping banks:

1.  Foreclosure relief in many cases simply stretches out borrowers' slow bleed of resources. By keeping borrowers in limbo while letting lenders delay repossessing houses they can't sell, foreclosure aid is now benefiting borrowers less than the lenders who created the mortgage mess. For lenders, mortgage modification is the waiting room in the mortuary, a convenient place to hold borrowers while the banks deal with the overflow of houses already repossessed.

2.  Most borrowers behind on their mortgages are already overburdened with other debts. After the mortgage reduction, the typical modification recipient, despite an average $513 drop in monthly payments, has to devote 63.5% of his or her income to mortgage payments, other debt, and taxes.

3.  Banks don't have to kick people out quickly.  Banks have steadily slowed down the foreclosure process: The average homeowner in foreclosure now is an amazing 461 days behind in his payments. Barry Ritholtz of financial blog The Big Picture calls banks' reluctance to take over houses "strategic non-foreclosure." Taking a leisurely path to repossession lets lenders avoid the costs of maintaining properties they can't sell in a market that remains in free fall in much of the country.

4.  The last insult added to this mess comes from Fannie Mae, which has promulgated new rules that lock those who don't make the effort to modify their mortgages out of the Fannie-backed mortgage market for seven years.  So ultimately this comes full circle, and what started as an effort to help borrowers has become another cudgel in the hands of lenders.

Spending up more than income

Consumer spending is critical because it accounts for 70% of economic activity.  The Commerce Department says spending fell 0.1% in April, rose a tiny 0.1% in May, was flat in June, but rose 0.4% in July.  Personal incomes were up 0.2% in July, less than expected but at least an improvement over June when incomes had not risen at all.  With spending rising, the personal savings rate slowed to 5.9% of after-tax income. That's down from 6.2% in June, the highest in nearly a year. Even with the July decline, the savings rate is nearly three times higher than it was before the recession began in December 2007.

The July spending gain was the highest since a 0.5% rise in March. But the concern is that demand could taper off in the second half of this year if unemployment remains near double digits.  If Americans don't have jobs, they don't have the income to support spending. the economy is growing too slowly to support sustained job growth and some fear it could fall back into a recession. Economic growth slowed to 1.6% in the April-to-June quarter, the government reported Friday. That was revised down from the initial estimate of 2.4%.  A string of weak economic reports in recent weeks has prompted economists to trim their growth forecasts for the rest of the year and next.

Fannie Mae portfolio up 4.1%

Fannie Mae’s mortgage portfolio through July is up 4.1% from the year ago yet down somewhat from June, and the GSE issued nearly half the mortgage-backed securities during the month than in did last July.  Fannie ended July with gross holdings of nearly $812 billion. That figure stood at $770.4 billion last year and $817.8 billion in June.  The agency issued $42.7 billion of mortgage-backed securities during July, a nearly 48% decline from $79.7 billion a year earlier but up 6.4% from June. Fannie’s MBS issuances peaked in June 2009, when more than $130 billion was issued.

The serious delinquency rate in Fannie Mae’s portfolio fell to 4.99% in June, which is the latest month data is available, from 5.15% in May. For the year-ago July, the agency’s delinquency rate was 4.17%. The rate peaked at 5.59% in February and was as low as 3.42% in April 2009.  "Fannie Mae and FHLB are taking advantage of better funding from callables as bullet LOAS widens due to renewed corporate issuance and calmer short LIBOR levels," said Jim Vogel of FTN Financial. "The gain can be as much as 10bp.  The obvious result is that both need less funding from bullets and floaters.  The superior funding stems primarily from the constant demand for new callables to replace those redeemed at close to a $100 billion monthly pace."

NABE – economists mixed on what to do

The National Association of Business Economists (NABE) said Monday that three-quarters of its members believe that promoting economic growth should be a higher priority than reducing the national deficit, according to an August survey of the nation's economic policy.  However, nearly the same number of NABE economists said they do not think another stimulus package is necessary to halt the economic slowdown and get the economy back on track. At the same time, a majority believe that policymakers should do more to boost job growth.

The survey, based on responses from 84 NABE economists who work for private-sector firms and industry trade associations, comes as economic growth in the United States has slowed significantly after rebounding from a deep recession.

The NABE survey showed that just under half of those polled see deflation as the main threat facing the economy in the short term, but respondents were less certain about whether inflation or deflation is the biggest threat over the next three years.  In a sign of the challenges currently facing Fed policy makers, there was little consensus among the NABE economists on when the central bank will raise interest rates and begin selling off assets it bought during the financial crisis.  After cutting rates to historic lows near 0% in December 2008, the Fed has been without its main tool for supporting economic activity for nearly two years. It has since bought billions worth of Treasury bonds in an effort to bring down rates for home and other consumer loans.

But some central bankers are worried about adding to the $2 trillion worth of assets the Fed has acquired over the last few years.  A clear majority of economists said that none of the existing tax cuts on individual income, dividends and capital gains should be allowed to expire.

Homebuyer's tax credit coming back?

After a worse than expected falloff in home sales during the month of July, buzz about a possible revival of the federal homebuyer tax credit has begun to surface.  The National Association of Realtors (NAR) reported last week that sales of previously owned homes plummeted 27 percent in July, hitting their lowest mark in 15 years. New home sales also took a dive, dropping nearly 13 percent from June to July.  Both reports were clear indications of the frailty of the housing market post-stimulus. Although, the steep declines were actually considered a by-product of the tax credits themselves, which expired on April 30 – payback for the incentives that pulled sales forward into the spring months.

HUD Secretary Shaun Donovan said on CNN’s “State of the Union” program this weekend, “The July numbers were worse than we expected, worse than the general market expected, and we are concerned. That’s why we are taking additional steps to move forward.  Donovan said it was too early to say for sure, after only one month’s numbers, whether the administration would revive its popular homebuyer tax credits to give the housing markets another much-needed boost, but he didn’t wholly rule it out as an option.  “All I can tell you is that we are watching very carefully,” Donovan told CNN. “We’re going to be focused like a laser on where the housing market is moving going forward, and we are going to go everywhere we can to make sure this market stabilizes and recovers.”  Two U.S. Senate candidates from Florida, one of the hardest hit states by the housing downturn, spoke out in favor of bringing back the federal tax credits for homebuyers on the CNN program.

$

The MAIN ISSUE in court is NOT to argue the existence of the promissory note. Remember that.  The note does get redeemed as cash to the bank. Don’t get caught up on the issue of the original note or a copy of it. This note argument is not enough for you to win, or enough for them to prove standing. The alleged lender will actually be in court to win based a foreclosure on the trust deed/or mortgage, not the note. The note process only sets up the argument for you.

The REAL issue to argue in court is to prove their “standing” due to the non-validity of the deed of trust (or mortgage).  That contract is only about their “power of sale” and standing.  If they cannot prove the validity of their contract, they lose.

Remember the deed of trust said something to the effect “I am fully seized of the property”, meaning you own it free and clear of liens and encumbrances. This proves they used the promissory note (signed just before) as a cash payment. Their non disclosure of this is fraud upon you, the victim.

This is a key transitional point in your argument and position

They were paid and then agreed to it in the deed of trust/mortgage. However, if they are saying they actually gave you real money as a loan, this could not have also happened. Only if they accepted the note as cash could this be true. Therefore, the deed of trust would be invalid on it’s face, and therefore their claim of a debt owed and damaged invalidated.  For them to be there claiming you owe a debt is contradictory to the language of the deed of trust. If the deed of trust is valid, have them bring proof of their claim, right to standing, and claim.  In other words, you can demand they must show their damages, using several accounting documents they would need to possess, if the loan had in fact been made (see the first letter to lender to lender for that example).

If their deed of trust/mortgage contract is not valid, they have no standing and lose before the case is presented.  This is where you can win in court.  Were they “injured”? Make them prove it.

You need to require them to produce validity of their claim.  If you do not force them to bring this evidence, they will not have to present it, because the judge will presume they have standing, and thus they can win automatically.  This is where a lot of cases are lost.

The judge already presumes the alleged mortgage is valid. By they way, once a case is being responded to or your are filing a new case, you need pre-file your documents into the court record before entering (use a process server to give it more standing). When in court, object to anything other than their providing required evidence to prove standing, as a damaged party. They cannot have been “injured”, because no legal consideration was given by them to establish the deed of trust. This is your key to winning.

You must move the court to force them bring the evidence and prove their standing as a truly damaged party.  Object to any presentation of their evidence that does not prove the “validity” of the deed of trust/mortgage. No “valid” deed of trust/mortgage equals no case for them. Object to everything they present short of the documents demanded in the first letter to lender.  Then YOU move the judge to order a summary judgment in your favor, if they cannot produce sufficient evidence.

Getting into any other arguments or points the attorney for the other side presents, will likely be nothing but legal trickery to get you off subject.  Then you lose by presumption.

Keys to winning in court:

1. Do not argue the note, but argue the validity of the deed of trust/mortgage.

2. Object to anything other than their proving validity of the dot/mortgage. If the note was accepted as cash by them, the sale was paid in full; there would be no need for a dot/mortgage, and thus that dot/mortgage would be invalid.

If they accepted the note as payment in full, then the dot/mortgage clause regarding being fully seized” would be accurate.  So why is there a dot/mortgage at all?  Was this disclosed to you?  NO

3. Make them prove they loaned you real money and were thus damaged, using the documents listed in the first letter to lender. If they cannot prove their standing and claim, they do not have a valid agreement, and thus no claim.

4. Object to anything other than making these points about proving standing.

5. Move the court for summary judgment in your favor and to dismiss their claim.

PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT:  Get with a friend and practice writing your argument, and practice making these arguments. Practice prepares you to jump into the jungle, like a soldier.  Also go to court and watch a few times before you ever present your case.  Watch for news on this.

Mortgage News by MortgageDaily.com

Save money on legal preps for a mortgage case, by first learning about Jurisdictionary.

Save money by self preparing before you hire an attorney, and of course use legal help if you need it.  Make an educated choice though and don’t throw money away on attorneys until you understand the basics of the Quick Admin process and how you will apply it in your case first.  This suggested bonus educational course costs less than 1 hour of “lawyer time”, and it’s the best enhancing content we could find.  Also note, they have a member discussion board as well.

When you take the lender to task by making them prove their standing, they will try to divert the issue. OBJECT, and hold them to that issue.

http://livingfreeandclear.com/selflegal

———————————–

Putting the Brakes on Crooked Judges & Lawyers!

Stop courtroom corruption!

Learn how to control judge.

From ATTY: Frederick Graves

The most important thing to learn about winning lawsuits is the easiest to learn!

Timely objections!

I'll explain some of this in today's Tips & Tactics, but I can't go "into depth" with you today. None of this is hard, but I cannot begin to explain all the courtroom objections you need to know or all you need to know about how and when to make them in this single newsletter. You need my affordable step-by-step 24-hour Jurisdictionary self-help course to prepare for hearings and trial! Order today (if you aren't a case-winner who already has my course).

You cannot win without controlling the court.

Many people (from watching courtroom battles on TV or at the movies) believe we make objections to control "the other lawyer". In fact, that is the smallest part of it.

We object to threaten the judge with appeal!

If a judge didn't have to worry about appeal, he could rule any way he wishes — knowing absolutely nothing you can do will reverse his decisions.

I'll bet many of you didn't know that.

If an issue is not raised during lower court proceedings, appellate courts will not consider the issue after you lose. That is a hard-and-fast rule of appellate courts!

If the other side crosses the line, you must object. If the judge sustains your objection, you stop the tricks.

If the judge overrules your objection, you object again and state your reasons … even if the judge threatens you with contempt! At the close of the other side's argument, you renew your objections once again. At the close of all deliberation, you renew once more, to make crystal clear to the judge that you are not playing!

If you don't object, you cannot win on appeal.

And, of course, you must arrange in advance of every hearing and trial for the proceedings to be recorded by an official court reporter … or you cannot win on appeal. If the judge knows you cannot win on appeal, you've given him a free hand to do as he pleases. Not good!

The judge is not the authority!

You must make it crystal clear on the court's record that the judge will be reversed on appeal if he rules against you, and you do this by making timely objections and renewing them if you are overruled.

The reason we renew our objections is to give the judge one more opportunity to do what's right! Appellate courts want the record to show that the judge was very much aware of your objections, the grounds for your objections, and stubbornly refused to follow the law!

Each time you object (and state the grounds for your objections, unlike TV actors) you put the judge on notice that overruling your objection threatens appeal.

If your objections have solid legal footing and the judge overrules your objections, he is skating on thin ice!

When you renew your objections, he knows you intend to take him up on appeal if his errors harm your cause.  For example, one of the most common errors is letting the lawyer on the other side "testify". The lawyer on the other side is not a witness. He doesn't have first-hand knowledge of the facts. He lacks "competence" to testify to any fact he learned from others. Far too many good people (who don't have my affordable step-by-step 24-hour Jurisdictionary self-help course where they could have learned all this and more) lose their lawsuits simply because they allow the lawyer on the other side to put facts into the record that are beyond the lawyer's own, personal knowledge.

Failure to object is fatal.

"Objection, your Honor. Counsel is testifying to facts beyond his personal knowledge and lacks competence to act as lawyer and witness at the same time!"

If the judge sustains your objection, you've put a stop to one of the most common outlaw games crooked lawyers play … and you've strengthened your case.

If the judge overrules your objection, just stand up and say, "Let the record reflect my objection that opposing counsel lacks competence to testify to these matters."

When the other side finishes his presentation, object again!

At the close of all the testimony, object again!

Don't let corrupt judges and crooked lawyers win!

Clever argument is not enough.

Knowing the law is not enough.

Controlling judges is what wins lawsuits!

You control judges by making clear on the record that you intend to appeal if the judge rules against you!

You do this by making timely objections and renewing your objections so the record is crystal clear!

Know how to control the judge – or you will lose!

These "Tips & Tactics" newsletters are only the very tip of the iceberg of lawsuit knowledge you need to win. If you don't already have my 24-hour step-by-step self-help course, go to my website and order now!

Learn how to control judges by timely objecting!

http://livingfreeandclear.com/selflegal 

As Woody Guthrie used to sing, "This Land is our Land," and that includes every courtroom and every courthouse from San Diego to Bangor, Maine. Why let lawyers control our lives with trickery? Why let judges destroy our lives by letting lawyers get away with their typical trickery?

If you aren't involved in a lawsuit or threatened with one right now, why not learn what my course teaches so you can help others?

There are more than 150 lawsuits filed every minute in the United States – nearly 100 million each year. Try to imagine how many thousands of good, honest people will have their lives completely destroyed in this week alone, simply because they have no idea how to use the official rules to protect themselves and have nobody they can trust (or afford) to help them win!

Urge everyone to get my affordable 24-hour course!

Do it for your nation and our children!

Dr. Frederick David Graves, JD

http://livingfreeandclear.com

The MAIN ISSUE in court is NOT to argue the existence of the promissory note. Remember that.  The note does get redeemed as cash to the bank. Don’t get caught up on the issue of the original note or a copy of it. This note argument is not enough for you to win, or enough for them to prove standing. The alleged lender will actually be in court to win based a foreclosure on the trust deed/or mortgage, not the note. The note process only sets up the argument for you.  

The REAL issue to argue in court is to prove their “standing” due to the non-validity of the deed of trust (or mortgage).  That contract is only about their “power of sale” and standing.  If they cannot prove the validity of their contract, they lose.  

Remember the deed of trust said something to the effect “I am fully seized of the property”, meaning you own it free and clear of liens and encumbrances. This proves they used the promissory note (signed just before) as a cash payment. Their non disclosure of this is fraud upon you, the victim.

This is a key transitional point in your argument and position

They were paid and then agreed to it in the deed of trust/mortgage. However, if they are saying they actually gave you real money as a loan, this could not have also happened. Only if they accepted the note as cash could this be true. Therefore, the deed of trust would be invalid on it’s face, and therefore their claim of a debt owed and damaged invalidated.  For them to be there claiming you owe a debt is contradictory to the language of the deed of trust. If the deed of trust is valid, have them bring proof of their claim, right to standing, and claim.  In other words, you can demand they must show their damages, using several accounting documents they would need to possess, if the loan had in fact been made (see the first letter to lender to lender for that example).

If their deed of trust/mortgage contract is not valid, they have no standing and lose before the case is presented.  This is where you can win in court.  Were they “injured”? Make them prove it.

You need to require them to produce validity of their claim.  If you do not force them to bring this evidence, they will not have to present it, because the judge will presume they have standing, and thus they can win automatically.  This is where a lot of cases are lost. 

The judge already presumes the alleged mortgage is valid. By they way, once a case is being responded to or your are filing a new case, you need pre-file your documents into the court record before entering (use a process server to give it more standing). When in court, object to anything other than their providing required evidence to prove standing, as a damaged party.  They cannot have been “injured”, because no legal consideration was given by them to establish the deed of trust. This is your key to winning.

You must move the court to force them bring the evidence and prove their standing as a truly damaged party.  Object to any presentation of their evidence that does not prove the “validity” of the deed of trust/mortgage. No “valid” deed of trust/mortgage equals no case for them. Object to everything they present short of the documents demanded in the first letter to lender.  Then YOU move the judge to order a summary judgment in your favor, if they cannot produce sufficient evidence.  

Getting into any other arguments or points the attorney for the other side presents, will likely be nothing but legal trickery to get you off subject.  Then you lose by presumption.

Keys to winning in court:

1. Do not argue the note, but argue the validity of the deed of trust/mortgage.

2. Object to anything other than their proving validity of the dot/mortgage. If the note was accepted as cash by them, the sale was paid in full; there would be no need for a dot/mortgage, and thus that dot/mortgage would be invalid.

If they accepted the note as payment in full, then the dot/mortgage clause regarding being fully seized” would be accurate.  So why is there a dot/mortgage at all?  Was this disclosed to you?  NO

3. Make them prove they loaned you real money and were thus damaged, using the documents listed in the first letter to lender. If they cannot prove their standing and claim, they do not have a valid agreement, and thus no claim.  

4. Object to anything other than making these points about proving standing.

5. Move the court for summary judgment in your favor and to dismiss their claim.

PRACTICE MAKES PERFECT:  Get with a friend and practice writing your argument, and practice making these arguments. Practice prepares you to jump into the jungle, like a soldier.  Also go to court and watch a few times before you ever present your case.  Watch for news on this.

Of course the downsize is that the market could not rescue itself, and thus required he biggest FED bailout since 9/11.

The risk this causes is that rates cold be driven higher as the dollar may be devaluated, s usually happens in such a cycle of activity. A lower dollar means, it will cost more to buy good, especially foreign good and services. That is something America depends on too much these days. My advice, start buying American, and lets strengthen the fundamentals of our own economy and I believe everything can stabilize soon.

What does this mean to the consumer in the housing market? Expect a slow recovery in prices and interest rates. Fortunately it can also mean a better supply of funds to make he mortgage investors comfortable enough to start investing in mortgage backed securities, and thus provide new money into the system, for we consumers to borrow to buy property again.

Be sure to get to our upcoming live event. Get details at http://tjmarrs.com

T.J. Marrs
http://tjmarrs.com
http://livingfreeandclear.com
http://creclub.com

Today’s rescue by the federal reserve of the mortgage bond market was a positive sign, that the federal reserve (the FED), has finally recognized the risks inherent in the housing and mortgage market.  Good for them.

Of course the downsize is that the market could not rescue itself, and thus required he biggest FED bailout since 9/11.

The risk this causes is that rates cold be driven higher as the dollar may be devaluated, is usually happens in such a cycle of activity.  A lower dollar means, it will cost more to buy good, especially foreign good and services.  That is something America depends on too much these days.  My advice, start buying American, and lets strengthen the fundamentals of our own economy and I believe everything can stabilize soon.

What does this mean to the consumer in the housing market?  Expect a slow recovery in prices and interest rates.  Fortunately it can also mean a better supply of funds to make he mortgage investors comfortable enough to start investing in mortgage backed securities, and thus provide new money into the system, for we consumers to borrow to buy property again.

T.J. Marrs
http://tjmarrs.com
http://livingfreeandclear.com

http://creclub.com

Did you know the average American’s financial position is getting worse? Here are some facts from the following article.

• * 46.2% of all families now carry a credit card balance. up from 44.4% in 2001
• * $2200 in credit card debt on average
• * 13% average interest rate
• * $55 dollars per month Minimum payment
• * 14 years to pay it off
• * $1500 additional interest

Article

Source                                                                                          Date
Dobbs: Are you a casualty of the class war? CNN.com 10-4-2006
Foreclosures spiked in August CNNMoney.com 9-15-2006
Nightmare Mortgages

Business Week 9-11-2006
Reasons to Worry NY Times Magazine 6-11-2006
The American Way: Debt NY Times Magazine 6-11-2006
Have an extra half million to spare? USA Today 5-24-2006
Millions Are Facing Squeeze On Monthly House Payments realestatejournal.com 3-15-2006
Consumer debt loads at record USA Today 4-23-2006
Federal Reserve Releases New Statistics About Credit Cards Send2press Newswire 3-2-2006
Home loan delinquency rate shows increase USA Today 3-17-2006
Americans Have Negative Savings Rate CBS News 2-7-2006
U.S. savings rate hits lowest level since 1933 MSNBC 1-30-2006
Debt: How do you stack up? CNNMoney.com 10-7-2003