Saving 10-20 million foreclosures

1 post / 0 new
Robbrian's picture
Status: Member (Offline)
Joined: May 21 2009
Posts: 22
Saving 10-20 million foreclosures

In your Report September 22, 2009 you wrote:
Tracking the housing market helps us see where the economy is headed.  Two categories of data that are useful to focus on are house prices and housing supply.
House Prices
Measuring the value of housing is critical, because the amount of foreclosures and the economic fallout from them are both tightly linked to the difference between the current value of a house and the mortgage held on it.
Housing Supply
To appreciate housing supply, there are three things we need to track:

  • Total number of existing homes for sale (expressed in either a raw number or in “month's supply,” which takes the raw number and divides it by the current sales pace)
  • Total number of new homes for sale (expressed the same as above)
  • Amount of “shadow inventory,” which are homes that are on the books of the banks but have not been released into the market for sale

This does not track with real market manipulation by the Federal Reserve's appraisal rule change, and the MERS/REIT/Bank foreclosure/ownership issue; Price and supply are being manipulated down with the use of illegally contrived appraisals using duress sales.
That said at this point in time, I wish the illegality would come out; then you could take the 8-10 million foreclosures off the market and stop the short sales, making virtually no supply, and prices would rise. In the meantime, if the truth came out, we could all sue the banks and the Fed for:
-- their part in changing appraisal rules;
-- taking down the market and
-- positioning the banks and REITS` to capitalize, massively, on the foreclosure debacle before us now.
The REITs and the banks use MERS, illegally to order foreclosures because they really don't know who owns all the little pieces of mortgages in their derivative packages.
As for MERS, it is basically a little tap dance that the banks amazingly dreamed up to pretend that the ownership of the note was under the MERS shell.  They point to it in the mortgage documents that recent purchasers signed- and in the agreements between the banks and MERS, and they point to it in the courts, but if you picked up the shell it would not have the ownership pea under it is not the banks that get to name a nominee; it is the REIT that must do it. A big tip off is that once default is declared MERS cannot come in on the foreclosure. MERS is listed as holder on over 60 million mortgages.  
The bottom line is the IRS rule. The REITS and MERS are two separate animals. The REIT is what the investor invests in; he does not buy shares in MERS. The IRS says the REITS must own and hold the title to the property in their name.  . . .period - end of discussion. It does not say Fannie MAE may hold them; nor can Freddie. In fact the IRS law says the opposite; it says that while a REIT can have a nominee act in its name, that nominee cannot be a finance or insurance company, and whomever they do pick has to be in writing, and it must be registered and recorded with the SEC, and it has to be on the <> web site for the public to see.

None of the REITS have made MERS their nominee. The banks made MERS their nominee for the property they do not own, and if they do own it, then they are holding stolen property that belongs to the REIT. Same goes for Freddie and Fannie.  When a foreclosure is contested, the owner would get a letter from Freddie saying: Hey I own the property . . .but that was before the 41 year old head committed suicide. I guess he goofed, admitting that he had ownership, when he was not supposed to; now they send letters with the banks and Freddie's or Fannie's name together. A foreclosure partnership????? I think not.
An investor cannot invest in a figment of their imagination. The IRS also says that a REIT cannot dispose of a property that is not foreclosed, and there are sever penalties if they do . Between 5-7 are allowed depending on the year the REIT was formed and they will just make you owe taxes for the full amount you sold them for and anyone involved in the transaction is libel for the taxes- all the way down the line; if you go over that number, the IRS brings out the gong and there is no more REIT.
I have read the IRS rule over and over. You read them and tell me if I have interpreted them wrong.  Numbers 856-859.  You see if you can find on the EDGAR files any REIT, domestic of foreign, that has named MERS as a nominee to foreclose for them.  
These banks have to be held accountable for hocking stolen property, and more importantly for destroying its value for the investors of the REITS with contrived and illegal appraisals, because .they used duress sales which are not arms length.  There is already a law firm suing Wells Fargo because they lowered equity lines using short sales and foreclosure values.

The banks lost no money on these loans; they sold them to the REITS, and with the amount of short sales that have gone on, technically, the REITS have been gone for a long time.
That's the irony of it; the banks will fail because they invested in the REIT derivatives game even knowing that Fannie et al, had never transferred ownership to them as they were supposed to do. They should fail.
When other States take a look at the recent decision in Kansas concerning MERS
there will be a national moratorium on foreclosures: for a summary of the legal opinion please follow this link.
Robert Bostick and Andrea Silverthorne
"Web of Debt", by Ellen H. Brown, J.D.  
 The one book the Federal Reserve doesn't want you to read. Click here  <>

Login or Register to post comments