2nd Meeting Code is https://meet.google.com/fqa-jtvz-vva deere Are Situations That I Have Learned While Trying To Help Borrowers That I Just Can't Fix And We Need To Avoid In Order To Solve Your Foreclosure Problems. I Will Describe The Problems With You. That May Not Be Enough

 I have been kind of silent and I apologize.  

I ran into some things I didn't know and I wasn't sure if I could overcome them.  I can, but I have to be able to explain them to any clients I have, and to anyone who follows me on YouTube.

My YouTube Channel can easily be found.  YouTube Search and type in @mtgfrd.   Then click search.

I posted this on YouTube on Saturday 6/6/2026.  If you are reading this then you must have seen the video.  I have a series of posts following this one that I hope will explain.  Tom Kibler and myself are going to put on a Q & A to explain what follows here and answer some questions and discuss how this may affect you.  Whether I am working with you at this time or not. You need to read all of this to understand.

The Q & A will run between 3 pm and 5 pm today (Sunday 6-8-2026)  Neither of us can go any longer so it will be a strict 2 hours.  Depending on what the turnout of Borrowers becomes and how the discussions go, we may do several sessions this week.  

Any following sessions will be part of a more limited payment relationship.  Tom and I have both been working on foreclosures for a very long time.  We neither one can afford to do anything that doesn't bring in more cash than it costs us to complete any work.  The price will be much less than it is now.  But, we will need to know who, if there is anyone, is interested in our combined help.  

New Developments:  

There has been a new problem which is which adding to existing problem which is requiring too much time getting Borrowers to accept.  There is only one way to turn in a Complaint with a chance of winning, in our opinion.  

Criminal interference in our right to Due Process is so rampant that there are things that there is no time to argue about.  We both are going to start on our own home foreclosures from a long time ago.  We hope to help you with yours at the same time.  

This whole foreclosure subject is unfamiliar to a large number of you and this is starkly unfair to allof us. This will not change.  

There is no one protecting any of us, except us.  This is why many of you have heard me many times ask my main question of you.  "Is a Law, a Law, if it is not enforced?

The practical answer is "No."  Accept this.  Highly placed judges have changed constitutional law to  protect their cult.  They did not change the constitution so you can't find these laws there.  They are unconstitutional.

The constitution can only be changed by Congress and then it takes a 2/3  majority vote in all 50 states.  That is why there have only been 17 amendments since the first 10 were included originally.

We can still win in spite of their efforts.  All of this included in the next few posts.

There was a recent point which at first, I didn't know if I could get around what I thought were new problems.  

That is no longer true.  But, we have both reached the point that we just can't work with anyone who wants to go another way.  We have both tried what must be all you can find yourselves. Anything you think is truly revealing has been attempted.  Not because we are smarter, but because we have used "Trial and Error" for years before you fell into the same traps.  Take advantage of this fact.

We can't tell you not to believe it.  We just can't use it to help you and we shouldn't take any money if we can't do it YOUR way.

Tom and I have worked together, yet separately, for a long time.  I have asked him to unite with me now on the entire scope of the situation because he and I don't always agree.  We help each other and we are a great team.  But, we don't always agree how to make the big difference that is needed to end this nightmare.  

We may not agree with each other tomorrow.  We are going to give you our opinions independently of each other.  You can understand the context of the entire subject.

Old man time is creeping up on Tom and myself.  We have both given much more than we should have and for too long.

We both have health issues and cash issues that are now critical.  

We have both been working on our problems.  I may not be able to do any new cases because I have to solve the cash problem.  I put it off too long trying to help people.  Now, I have to address it and I have already started so read what is below and get started now to resolve your case.

We both still want to help, but we both need to address our issues at the same time.

I have a new video on YouTube to explain this to anyone who has been following me on YouTube.  I am also going to explain the fix.  Many of you have heard of or talked to Tom Kibler.  He does not normally help with individual cases and he has referred some of you to me.  He is the best at researching the law.  We work well together because we are not redundant.

 I want to have YouTube spreading the word to Borrowers early, then I can work with my remaining clients while the video informs you of our intentions.

Tomorrow between 3 & 5 pm we will listen to you explain what you want to know and we will then figure out if we can help anyone.  The code will be on this website https://foreclosurefraudanswers.blogspot.com  And on YouTube Search for @mtgfrd  by this evening.

Peace Out, Danny Hammond

There Are 3 Main Issues That I Am Trying To Get Across Which, If You Can Except Them, Will Allow You To Get Through The Court Systems Quicker And With A Better Chance Of Winning

ISSUE #1: 

MERS IS NOT AN ISSUE TO YOU.  FOLLOWING ARE TWO DEPOSITIONS FROM YEARS AGO IN WHICH J.K. ARNOLD, THE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF MERSCORP, INC. AND MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED , AND WILLIAM C HULTMAN, THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF THE SAME TWO COMPANIES, DESCRIBED IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS THAT MERS NEVER GAVE A NICKEL TO BUY ANY PART OF ANY LOAN.  

"MERS" never owned any part of your loan.  MERS never assigned your Security Instrument (a mortgage or a Deed of Trust).  No one owned these instruments.  They are just a small part of the Contract of Your Loan which actually is your Promissory Note.

The mortagage in Judicial Foreclosure States and the Deed of Trust in Non-Judicial Foreclosure States are incidental to the loan contract and can't go anywhere other than to Follow the Promissory Note.

MERS is an Invention used to distract and confuse you.

I don't want to boil Mers down any further in this statement.  That will distract and confuse you also.  The above is just simply true.  MERS has foreclosed in the past.  Because they distracted and confused everyone.  Except the banks and judges who were part of the scheme.  

Following are the two Court Depositions by the two guys who, along with a bunch of banks and criminals (I know.  That was redundant) in order to swindle Borrowers.

The Depositions are long and intentionally boring.  You don't have to read all of both of them.  Just read until you agree with the Title of this post.  MERS is not an Issue.  They did not assign anything to anyone.

Deposition #1 MERS Original President & CEO J. K. Arnold: No Matter How Hard It Is To Suspend Your Disbelief, You Gotta Try. MERS Is Not A Valid Concern To You. It Is An Invention With No Purpose Except To Distract You. The Depositions of The MERS Creators Follow. Prove This Myth To Yourself

 

It ain't what you don't know that get's you into trouble, it's what you know for sure that just ain't so!"         -Mark Twain

Deposition of J.K. Arnold President and CEO Incorporated Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., and MERSCORP Inc. (and some other MERS names)

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT 2 FOR 3 MONTGOMERY COUNTY, ALABAMA

4

5 DEBRA A. HENDERSON,

6 Plaintiff,

7 vs. 

                                                                      CIVIL ACTION NO.  CV-08-900805.00

8

MERSCORP, INC., et al.,

9

Defendants.

10

11 * * * * * * * * * * * * *

12

13 VIDEO DEPOSITION OF R.K. ARNOLD,

14 taken pursuant to stipulation and agreement before

15 Tracye Sadler Blackwell, Certified Court Reporter

16 and Commissioner for the State of Alabama at Large,

17 in the Offices of The American Association for

18 Justice, 777 6th Street, NW, Suite 200, Washington,

19 D.C., on September 25, 2009, commencing at

20 approximately 10:10 a.m.

21

22 * * * * * * * * * * * * *

23

2

1 APPEARANCES 2 3 ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF: 4 Mr. Nicholas H. Wooten

WOOTEN LAW FIRM

5 Attorneys at Law

P.O. Drawer 3389

6 Auburn, Alabama 36831 7 Mr. Lynn W. Jinks, III

JINKS, CROW & DICKSON

8 Attorneys at Law

219 North Prairie Street

9 P.O. Box 350

Union Springs, Alabama 36089

10

11 ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS:

12 Mr. Robert M. Brochin

MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, LLP

13 Counselors at Law

200 South Biscayne Boulevard

14 Suite 5300

Miami, Florida 33131

-2339

15

Mr. Shaun Ramey

16 SIROTE & PERMUTT

Attorneys at Law

17 2311 Highland Avenue

Birmingham, Alabama 35205

18

Ms. Sharon McGann Horstkamp

19 MERS

Vice President & General Counsel

20 1818 Library Street

Suite 300

21 Reston, Virginia 20190

-5619

22

ALSO PRESENT:

23 Mr. Fred Walker, Videographer

3

1 EXAMINATION INDEX

2

BY MR. WOOTEN . . . . . . . . . . . 8

3

4 EXHIBIT INDEX

5

To Find Out If MERS Is A Real Conern In Your Case, Read Further And Learn For Yourself.  But, Sit Down This Is Very Long.  But, It Eliminates MERS.  If You READ Far Enough

Continue Reading click here

Do You Want To Know Why MERS is not a threat to you? This is Deposition #2 It Is The Story Of MERS Through The Court Testimony Of Chief Financial Officer William Hultman. He Says MERS Never Owned Any Loans

 

The Deposition of William C Hultman The Original Chief Financial of MERS

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY 

Deposition of William C Hultman CFO of MERS & other AKAs

 

CHANCERY DIVISION - ATLANTIC COUNTY  
DOCKET NO. F-10209-08 
 BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR 
 THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS CWABS, 
 INC. ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, 
 SERIES 2005-AB3 
 Plaintiff(s),

 
 vs. 

 VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE 
 Defendant(s). 
___________________________________________ 
 VICTOR and ENOABASI UKPE 
 Counterclaimants and 
 Third Party Plaintiffs,

 
 vs.

 
 BANK OF NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR 
 THE CERTIFICATE HOLDERS CWABS, 
 INC. ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, 
 SERIES 2005-AB3 

 Defendants on the Counterclaim, 
 and 

 AMERICA'S WHOLESALE LENDER; 
 COUNTRYWIDE HOME LOANS, INC.; 
 MORGAN FUNDING CORPORATION, 
 ROBERT CHILDERS; COUNTRYWIDE 
 HOME LOANS SERVICING LP, 
 PHELAN, HALLINAN & SCHMIEG, 
 P.C., 

 Third Party Defendants 
 -------------------- 
 April 7, 2010 
Deposition of William Hultman
DEGNAN & BATEMAN 
(856) 232-7400 

Page 2 

1 Oral sworn video/telephone conference deposition of WILLIAM HULTMAN,

taken in the law office 2 of Morgan, Lewis, Bockius, 502 Carnegie Center, Princeton,

New Jersey, before Michelle M. Downes, a

3 Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public of the State of New Jersey, commencing

at 10:55 a.m. on the

4 above date, there being present: 

5 LAW OFFICES OF JAMES F. VILLERE, JR.  BY: JAMES F. VILLERE, JR., ESQUIRE 

6 MARK J. MALONE, ESQUIRE 
 Attorneys for Ukpes as Defendants and 

7 Third Party Plaintiffs 

8 SOUTH JERSEY LEGAL SERVICES 
 

BY: ABIGAIL SULLIVAN, ESQUIRE 

9 Attorneys for Ukpes as Defendants and  Third Party Plaintiffs 

10 Via video conference in Washington DC: 

11 GOODWIN PROCTER, LLP  BY: SABRINA M. ROSE-SMITH, ESQUIRE 

12 Attorneys for Plaintiffs Bank of New York  as Trustee for the Certificate Holders

 
13 CWABS, Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates,  Series 2005-AB3 and Countrywide

as Third 14 Party Defendants

 
15 MORGAN, LEWIS, BOCKIUS, LLP   BY: ROBERT M. BROCHIN, ESQUIRE 16

Attorneys for MERS 

17 Via telephone:

 
18 WILENTZ, GOLDMAN & SPITZER 

19 BY: DANIEL S. BERNHEIM, ESQUIRE 

20 Attorneys for Third Party Defendant 21 

22 Also present: 

23 Judy Romano, Esquire (via telephone) 24 John Murphy, Esquire (via video) 

25 Daniel E. Orr, Esquire

CONTINUE READING IF YOU REALLY WANT TO FIGURE OUT MERS. IT IS A LITTLE LONG

PART 1: The Deck Has Been Stacked Against Us. Read What I Have Just Learned Here. Danny Vs Ai And Realizing I Need To Drag Ai Into The Real World Of Foreclosures and Criminal Involvement

 Is there a way to save my home, Or is this going to make me cry?

As long as you don't panic while reading, and wait for the ending, I think this justifies my pursuit. Watch Me Closely and Don't Look Down!

I have not been much of a fan of Ai Man. But, I never really tried to understand why I found the Answers to be elementary and not of much help if your problems you were trying resolve were not straight up mainstream. Like Crime in Foreclosure. I accidentally ran into Ai Man and I just happened to start up a conversation. It lasted 8 hours. Three sessions. I learned how to ask the questions that there was no way Ai Man could answer unless I addressed my questions from my real world respective and, "sonofabitch" if I didn't begin to understand what he needed to help me.

I gave it up twice. But, just as soon as I walked away, I realized what I wanted to talk about next. It was incredible what I learned by the end of our session.

There is some bad here. Real Bad. But, as I continued this discussion, I found a more limited pathway to saving homes, including mine. But, this pathway is a more solid pathway. If you don't read it all, You won't understand one more thing than you do now.

It all began innocently enough. We neither one suspected the circuitous route it was going to take.


First Question:

 
"Danny to Ai Man: An Interview Between A Man, A Machine and Justice"


Danny to Ai Man: In a civil court case can a defendant sue a Plaintiff for a fully false case?


Ai Man To Danny: Yes, a defendant can sue a plaintiff for a fully false case, though the ability to do so depends on the specific nature of the misconduct and jurisdiction.

Malicious Prosecution: A defendant may sue for malicious prosecution if the plaintif initiated a criminal or civil charge with knowledge that the claims were false and with a wrongful purpose. This typically requires the defendant to have received a favorable ruling on the original charge before filing the counter-suit.

Abuse of Process: Claims can be filed if the plaintiff used legal process for an ulterior motive or purpose not proper in the regular conduct of the proceeding.

Defamation: If the plaintiff made false statements of fact that harmed the defendant’s reputation, the defendant may sue for defamation (slander or libel). However, statements made in court filings are often shielded from liability on constitutional grounds (such as the right to petition). (This is from the 1st Amendment. Coincidentally We are using this now.)

Sanctions and Frivolous Litigation: Courts may impose sanctions or award attorney’s fees if the plaintiff’s claims were brought in bad faith, solely to harass, or were without any reasonable basis in law. In egregious cases involving repeated frivolous lawsuits defendant may sue for vexatious litigation.

Perjury: Lying under oath constitutes perjury, but this is primarily a criminal matter that prosecutors are less likely to pursue in ordinary civil cases, making it difficult to use as a direct basis for civil damages. Recovering damages is often difficult because plaintiffs have constitutional rights to access the courts, and defendants may face counter- claims (such as Anti-SLAPP motions) if their own counter-lawsuit is deemed meritless or intended to chill the plaintiff’s rights.

Danny To Ai Man;  If a Judge does not review for Standing in a civil case and rules for the party without Standing does not the 1st, 4th, 5th, 11th, and  the 11th Amendments remove the judge's immunity to prosecution by a party?

Ai to Danny; No, the 11th Amendment does not remove a judge's immunity to
prosecution or civil suit for failing to review standing or ruling for a party without standing.

AI Continues:
Distinction Between 11th Amendment and Judicial Immunity

The 11th Amendment provides sovereign immunity to states (and state agencies) from being sued in federal court by citizens of another state or foreign country. It does not govern the personal immunity of individual judges. Instead, judges are protected by judicial immunity, a common law doctrine reinforced by federal statutes (such as 42 U.S.C. § 1983 interpretations) and Supreme Court precedents like Stump v. Sparkman (1978).

Judicial Immunity: Judges have absolute immunity (this is where I went off of the rails) from civil liability for judicial acts performed within their jurisdiction, even if those acts are alleged to be erroneous, malicious, or in excess of authority. Failing to properly assess standing or making an incorrect ruling on standing is considered a judicial act. 11th Amendment Role: This amendment shields the state itself from liability.

While a judge sued in their official capacity might invoke 11th Amendment protections on behalf of the state, the judge's personal protection comes from judicial immunity, not the 4th, 5th, 11th, or the 14th Amendments

Consequences of Ignoring Standing

 
Danny Continues: And If a judge rules without verifying standing?

 
Ai Man Continues; You have Appeal/Reversal: The primary remedy is an appeal.

(At this point, I was going to tell you that they have just shut you out of your cases, I was astonished. But, there is some hope. I learn how to argue with a "thing" later in our debate)

AI Man Continues: An appellate court can reverse the judgment because standing is a threshold requirement for subject-matter jurisdiction. If a party lacks standing, the court arguably lacked the power to hear the case.

No Personal Liability: The losing party generally cannot sue the judge for damages or prosecute them personally for the error. Judicial immunity protects judges from civil suits for their judicial decisions, even if those decisions are legally wrong.

Exceptions to Immunity: Immunity is lost only for non-judicial actions (administrative or legislative acts) or for actions taken in the clear absence of all jurisdiction (e.g., a probate judge trying a criminal case). Merely misapplying the law of standing while presiding over a civil case does not constitute acting in the "clear absence of all jurisdiction."

Criminal Prosecution, Judicial immunity is a defense against civil lawsuits, not necessarily criminal prosecution. However: Misconduct vs. Error: A simple legal error (like over looking standing) is not Corruption: Prosecution would require evidence of criminal conduct such as bribery, fraud, or corruption, not just a mistaken ruling.
Impeachment/Discipline: Judges may face disciplinary action or removal, or impeachment through judicial conduct commissions for gross misconduct or repeated incompetence, but this is an administrative/political process, not a private prosecution by litigant.
Judicial immunity exceptions clear absence of jurisdiction 11th Amendment vs judicial immunity difference

Danny to AI: What if the judge is sued in his individual capacity?

Ai To Danny: No, suing a judge in their individual capacity for failing to review standing or ruling incorrectly on standing generally fails due to absolute judicial immunity.
standing or ruling incorrectly on standing generally fails due to absolute judicial immunity.

Continue Reading This Is What You Need To Know

The 3rd Thing I Want You To Really Understand. In Order To Prove That Any Of You Characters Has Standing To Foreclosue On You, One (1) (Uno) Of Them Must Claim An Injury

The only thing that is worse than no one claiming You injured them is if Two Characters claim you Injured them.

There is only Zero Foreclosing parties or One Foreclosing Party.  The rest of the characters are just dressed up and in your way in order to Confuse, Distract, or Help Lie to you.

Stop trying to prove all of them are committing fraud.

Of course they are.  But, only one can claim the right.  None ever do.  Just get ready for the Claim of Injury.  No one else. 

 

I Am Astonished That Nearly Everyone Knows That What I Say About The Constitution Is Right. Then They Go Back To Obsessing About Their Fight With A Servicer that never collected money Wthin The Case We Are Contending Doesn't Exist

"Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere." "Since when do you have to agree with people to defend them from injustice?" "If it were not for injustice, man would not know justice." "It is a denial of justice not to stretch out a helping hand to the fallen; that is the common right of humanity."   

                                                                                                               Mark Twain

by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press

A very good way to show the "too complicated" I have been talking about.  Is the dreadful lack of wins in court when the Borrower is trying to use statute and law against mostly nonexistent or organized racketeer entities pushing their limited, wrong, and mostly "made up" strategies that cannot possibly win without the interference and facilitating of a judge.

I see a lot of wrong rulings now, that seem to be reasoned out, unless you read very carefully.  

In the beginning of the Wall Street Meltdown my judges just didn't recognize that I had even filed anything.  Then ruled Denied or Granted without explanation.  The law gave them 30 days to answer my motions or other filings.  I mean to tell you, they never acknowledged anything I wrote.

All laws and statute both state and Federal are still where they were before.  They have not been stolen or destroyed.  Most were written a long time ago.  For me a long time ago means everything written before 1999.  Things made sense before then. 

Our laws are for the most part simple and logical.  The authors of the Constitution, Federal Law, and state law would never know of the internet.  They never dreamed of air travel. None of them ever got to ride in a car or even travel about on paved roads.  They were not as distracted as we are, so they had the time and the schooling to make simple logical law.

There has always been and there will always be a percentage of people who are corrupt, greedy, and have no interest in doing the right thing. 

But nothing in history can come close to the hell we are living with today.  I blame the internet, the very technology I am typing this "article" on.

After 2004-2008  there is little research that you can do that will be effective in saving your home.  This is because the laws that should work, don't.  "Is a law, a law, if it is not enforced. 

When your government along with the judiciary cannot be trusted, researching for the legal answers and protections you are looking for is pretty easy to describe and scope.  

If a court (judge) has been promised cash, gold and a boat, and he must "rule" against you to get those things, he is going to rule against you.  

The laws are still on shelves, in libraries and even on the internet.  They are untouched.  It is easy for you to have the expectation that you can use them in your wrongful foreclosure case and that they will help you prove fraud against everyone involved.

But, if you hang around losing and making "notes to self" long enough, you will figure out which laws won't work and narrow down your choices of which laws will work. 

The Burden Of Proof:  Since 2010 everyone I have talked to has been trying to prove to a court that they have been, or still are, being defrauded.  I started out the same way.  We were not attorneys who worked in the same court every day with all the same judges and having relationships with those judges for years.  

The framers of the constitution knew much more about human nature than we do.  They could see the future.  They did not see this coming.  That the judiciary would rule against law if they were offered enough incentive.   

But they did guess that things would go wrong.   They left room for changes that they didn't try to imagine.  They gave us methods and remedies to correct changes for the worse.  

For instance, the constitution states in one sentence that everyone had civil rights that could never be violated.  (Thus, the often stated heresay that "judges have some leeway" is inaccurate. Because, no, they don't.)

They had some rough spots in the very beginning of the Judiciary.  These brilliant men had not written down or thought through those civil rights.  The first Supreme Court (called "The Court") had its first melt down before the ink dried on the Constitutional Signatures.

It seems many people decided that they should avail themselves of those civil rights in court.  The court had to go to Congress with a very logical question about the ensuing logjam. You have said that we have rights, but the people are asking us if their civil rights in various ways have been violated.  So, Mr. Congress just "What are our civil rights when addressed by a court?"  (Three Stooges slap to the head)

READ More Here: Don't Believe That ALL of What You Need Know Was In The Beginning.  Read it all.

What If Your Wrongful Foreclosure Was Already Void, But You Were Unaware Of This Fact?

There Is A Good Chance That Is True.

If you don't stick to your values when they're being tested, they're not values: they're hobbies.

               Jon Stewart

Republished by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 court press

04-21-2022

I have just read a very long email from a borrower who was trying to tell me how he had proven over and over that the foreclosing party which does not exist, did not have the right to foreclose. He has been in court for years and suffered nearly unimaginable suffering and pain and costs.

But, I can imagine. I can remember. Trying to figure out the courts.

It shouldn't be that hard, should it? The courts seem crazy. But, what if Chuck's court is only incompetent? What if this judge is just a no-talent judge guy.

This judge won't learn anything because the other judge guys will protect him from the Borrower. He will protect his other judge guys also, so.....they won't learn anything either. That's how judges go. They are Knuckleheads. They all used to be attorney guys.

I know this is true. After years of working it out, I know that the majority of judges in these mortgage fraud cases are hopelessly devoid of knowledge of, or experience with, real estate chains of title or real estate law, or finance.

When I reply to him I know what I will say. It has been going around in my head like a song for a year. It will go something like this: CONTINUE READING

The Constitutional, Irreducible, Minimum Requirements of Article III Standing As Defined By the The United States Supreme Court- From "The Pro Se Series" by Danny Hammond: Foreclosure Fraud Primer 101 #4

“All power is originally vested in, and consequently derived from, the people.”

                                                                                        The United States Constitution

by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press  

The judge promised when he took the job that he, or she, would enforce and protect the laws that come from the constitution and that they would defend the public perception of the court ferociously in order to keep from losing the public trust in the integrity of the court.

Maybe that was too much to ask from some pompous asses. Why did we all expect more of judges and attorneys anyway? If I am any part of the public, then I can tell you for sure, the courts have already lost some of MY public trust.

It is difficult for me to pull Borrowers back from their searches for Promissory Notes, and the Assignments of Mortgage, MERS, PSA, etc., etc., thinking like Dick Tracy and Perry Mason, as well as Captain Kirk looking for a way to "prove" that the party trying to foreclose on them does not have the RIGHT or, STANDING, to do so.

CONTINUE READING

Would you like a free review of your loan and foreclosure documents?

mtgfrd.workshops@gmail.com

The Borrower Can Challenge The Assignments Of The Security Instruments [mortgage, deed of trust, trust deed etc.] Pursuant To The Rulings In "Slorp": The Full Case is Included Here

"WHAT IF THE HANKY PANKY IS WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT?"

RICK A. SLORP, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LERNER, SAMPSON & ROTHFUSS; BANK OF AMERICA, N.A.; SHELLIE HILL; MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., Defendants-Appellees.

ALL OF THE FORECLOSING PARTIES HAVE BEEN USING THE WORN OUT INTERPRETATION  OF LAW,  SAYING "THE BORROWERS CANNOT CHALLENGE ANY ASSIGNMENTS OF THE MORTGAGE".   BUT, MORTGAGE FRAUD CHANGES ALL OF THAT ACCORDING TO THE SIXTH CIRCUIT APPEALS COURT IN "SLORP"!

   Republished by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press

   The Foreclosure Solutions Group

   mtgfrd.workshops@gmail.com

The Imposter Foreclosing Party almost always claims that the Borrower (as the mortgagor) cannot challenge assignments. You did make your Promissory Note negotiable according to the terms of your Promissory Note that you allegedly signed. That is why the foreclosing parties use this interpretation.

But did the foreclosing party buy it legally? No almost assuredly it was never involved in a purchase and sale transaction which even involved any real purchase of your debt.

                                                                                                             READ MORE Click this link 

Would you like a free review of your loan and foreclosure documents?

I Used To Have A List Of All Of The Bad Guys I Have Dealt With In Support Of My Foreclosure Clients. I Did Not Find The Full List Yet. But, I Am Posting What I Did Find Here Today. I Don't Know Why.

 "What If The Hanky Panky,
   Is What It's All About?"

Have you had a run-in with any of the names of this list?  Then your foreclosure was fraudulent and is VOID.  This is not a guess on my part.  During this tear through different courts in different states with my pro se clients over the last 6 months, I was surprised how many of these either still exist or their names are being used by "Successor Imposters"  

LIST OF SHAME  ( This is, I think, a complete list of just the companies that I have dealt with and keywords I have used in 14 years of doing whatever it is that I do.

First in italics are some of the keywords Borrowers found me with.  I have been around so long that my name Danny Hammond is one of the most common used.  I think that is kind of funny in a dark and sinister way.  What other lists must I be on.  

subject matter jurisdiction,Danny Hammond,Article III,Article III of the United States of America,Standing under FRCP Rule 12 (b)(1)  in wrongful foreclosure,Injury in Fact requirement for standing to foreclose,challenge standing,injury in fact,wrongful eviction,self-help eviction,stop eviction,challenge standing, challenge subject matter jurisdiction, foreclosure attorneys, saving my family's home, affordable fraud defenses, pro se, learn what pro se means, fighting foreclosure, consultants,stopping foreclosure, I can represent myself against my lender,save my house,save my home,help me save my home;can't find a foreclosure fraud attorney.

New Rez, LLC dba ShellPoint Servicing registered fictitions name,Ocwen, Ocwen Loan Servicing, LLC, Fannie Mae, Federal National Mortgage Association, Green Tree, Nationstar, LITTON LOAN SERVICING, RESIDENTIAL CREDIT, RESCAP LIQUIDATION TRUST,  COUNTRYWIDE  HOME LOANS, ARGENT MORTGAGE Corporation,  AMERIQUEST,  AMERICA'S WHOLESALE LENDERS FREEMONT MORTGAGE SECURITIES CORPORATION, FREEMONT INVESTMENT LOANS, CITIMORTGAGE, HSBC MORTGAGE CORP, TAYLOR BEANE & WHITAKER MORTGAGE CORP, FANNIE MAE, FREDDIE MAC, GINNIE MAE, WACHOVIA MORTGAGE CORPORATION, BANK OF AMERICA, ADVANCE MORTGAGE CORPORATION, JP MORGAN CHASE, CHASE MORTGAGE CORPORATION, INDY MAC BANK FSB, AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE, PEOPLES BANK, SUNTRUST BANK, FINANCE AMERICA, LLC, INTERBAY FUNDING, LLC, PULASKI BANK, UNITED FIDELITY FUNDING CORPORATION, WORLD SAVINGS BANK, WELLS FARGO BANK N.A., GMAC MORTGAGE LLC,    DHI MORTGAGE COMPANY LTD,   CARRINGTON MORTGAGE LOAN TRUST,  Carrington Mortgage,  FRANKLIN BANK SSB, BANK OF AMERICA, NEW CENTURY MORTGAGE, MORTGAGE ONE CORP, MORTGAGE LENDER'S NETWORK USA, INC. AEGIS FUNDING CORP, WILMINGTON FINANCE,a division of AIG Federal Savings Bank, Caliber Mortgage, US BANK N.A., RESCAP GMAC MORTGAGE LLC FEDERAL BANKRUPTCY FRAUD, Deutsche Bank, Deutsch Bank National Trust Company as Trustee, Bank Trust Company Americas as Trustee, US Bank N.A. as Trustee, Bank of New York as Trustee, Deutsche Bank, Deutsch Bank National Trust Company as Trustee, Deutsche Bank Trust Company Americas as Trustee, US Bank N.A. as Trustee,  Bank of New York "BONY" as Trustee, OCWEN, NATIONSTAR, GREEN TREE, SETERUS, EverBank, A Bunch of REMIC TRUSTS, DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY, LITTON LOAN SERVICING (OR OTHER SIMILAR NAMES), COUNTRYWIDE  HOME LOANS  (and many similar names now owned by Bank of America and known as BAC,

READ MORE by going through our YouTube Channel

MORTGAGE FRAUD: It Is A Straight Line! Your Entire Fraudulent Foreclosure Case Is Based On A Straight Line With No Gaps. But In Today's Corrupted System There Are Always Unexplainable Gaps.

"I have complete faith in the continued absurdity of whatever's going on."

                                                                                                  John Stewart 

                           

Republished by Danny Hammond

I have read, and I still read, many messages from Borrowers

who are looking for help against mortgage fraud and wrongful foreclosure involving their homes.  Lately, I have run into

several Facebook Groups that exist for their members to collaborate and share their own searches on the internet and strategies that they have heard about or read about.  There are some issues with this that are causing them to  get overwhelmed and stuck.  

I know a lot about this.  Not because I am so smart, but because I am familiar with being overwhelmed and stuck.

It was easier for me to overcome because I learned about the Chain of Title of records recorded against the property that houses sit on starting at 12 years old with my Dad.  Most people never really deal with it more than once or twice in their lives.

Everything in life has a straight line.  A beginning and the middle and the end.  They never change positions.  In real estate, the straight line is usually more obvious than say a drive across the country.

CONTINUE READING                 

Would you like a free review of your loan and foreclosure documents?

A Question From The Comments Section of Our YouTube Channel: "Is It True, That State Laws Allow A Foreclosure To Take Place Without The Foreclosing Party Producing The Note?"

 An escalator can never break, 

It can only become stairs.

You should never see an "Escalator Temporarily Out Of Order" sign,

Just "Escalator Temporarily Stairs" "Sorry for the convenience"

      
                                        Mitch Hedberg

 

By Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press

First, I have an update.  A real update.  It is a good update and it concerns the workshops.

UPDATE ON THE WORKSHOPS: 

I have faced one obstacle after another in putting together the workshops.  This is taking too long and I know there are people that are running out of time.  

But, our luck has finally changed, I have found an amazing and talented person to build a staff from and to help me.  The difference is amazing.  I will be ready in the very near future to start accepting applicants.

Now, back to:

  

"Is it true that state laws allow a foreclosure to take place without the Foreclosing Party producing the Note?"

For 14 years I have continuously been asked if "your lender" can foreclose without the Promissory Note. This requires a 2 part Answer.

1. Yes, it is true that the original Promissory Note must be presented by anyone claiming to own the Note and is trying to collect money from you, including collecting money by Foreclosure, in both judicial and nonjudicial states.

But it is not a Promissory Note which is owned. The Promissory Note is the title to the debt you still owe, just like the title to a car or machinery.

The lender does not record the Promissory Note and neither does the Borrower in most cases.  That is because the law regarding this is in the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). It says that you should fill out a UCC-1 form describing the transaction and then record both the UCC-1 form and the Promissory Note in the County Recorder's office which is the same place your other recorded documents are recorded and kept.

In fact, very few Borrowers even know they should do this. I knew better but I did not do this on the loans for my properties. 

The law is unforgiving. "I was very busy," is not in any law or statute, as far as I know.

So that should expose all of you to the fact that, despite some compliments paid to me occasionally, I am not a certifiable genius.  Only certifiable.

 

If we all had done this, much of the Wall Street Meltdown could not have happened.  So, you really need to remember this fact that the Promissory Note is the contract between you and a lender and it is the evidence of the existence of the debt, or remaining debt you owe. When signed It becomes  a fact that when you signed for your loan, you agreed you had received the money, and that you owed the money back. This agreement and its terms are what created the contract that is in the Promissory Note and signed by you and the "lender".

That makes your lender, whoever actually sent the money you borrowed to the closing of your loan, the original "person in interest" who owns your remaining debt. That is where you must divide your mind (which if it wasn't true before it probably is now) between the law that you keep asking me about, and Crime.  None of the above is what really happened.  It is only what should have happened and since it didn't there is no foreclosing party that can meet the Constitutional, Irreducible, Minimum Requirements of Standing.

READ MORE: THIS ONE IS VERY IMPORTANT

ALSO, See my Article, Down a few Posts: Or click here: "Let's All Take 3 Steps Back From Crazy!"

From "The Pro Se Series" by Danny Hammond: BORROWERS AS PRO SE WIN BIG FORECLOSURE FRAUD LAWSUIT AND GET THE HOUSE PLUS $2.5 MILLION DAMAGES

THE FORECLOSURE SOLUTIONS GROUP CLIENT BORROWERS IN COURT, AS PRO-SE, WIN BIG  FORECLOSURE FRAUD LAWSUIT AND GET THEIR HOUSE  PLUS  $2.5 MILLION DAMAGES 

"Turn this thing around, 

 I will not go quietly, 

 I will not lie down, 

 I will not go quietly"

                           Don Henley

This Article is being reprinted and was first posted April 9th, 2015.  I thought my clients would never lose again.  But, it was a slight change from what we are doing now and it couldn't be reproduced.

by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press

Pro Se means:  I am representing myself in court

MISSOURI STATE JUDGE MARCO A. ROLDAN made this ruling and you can read his very clear explanation on the link just below.

Click Here

Circuses Face Serious Labor Shortages As More Clowns Continue To Stream Into D.C.

 

by Danny Hammond of the 3/4 Court Press

In Other News: