I had not been doing any of this for 3 years or so. After 13 years I was worn down. I was just unable to work on it. I had to stay away. Good thing I did because the answer to what I wanted to try (I actualy had tried it, but I didn't have part of the startegy figured out quite right yet) just popped into my head. I was even thinking about foreclosures. But, I guess I was always thinking, but now once again with a clear head.
Now I have won 6 foreclosure cases in a row in 113 days. This is since starting back up and getting my first Borrower to try our new plan about 90 days ago.
Here is an incredible fact, it is working as designed and we are winning. It is not a real streak yet, but 6 in a row and it went exactly as planned.
It hit me in 2017. I had just run myself into the ground and it was a hard road to walk back through.
You see, I could see that we were right but we were running into the problem of judges not enforcing the known laws. They are enforcing something, but it is difficult to get a good look through smoke and mirrors.
I have decided that we just keep using the best information we can and figure out how to make the judge as miserable and afraid as the Borrower. Fair is fair, after all.
Now on this case I thought we would need to make a move to keep him from overstating his denying he did not have jurisdiction to Review for Standing (which he absolutely did have nearly 10 months ago)
What is he thinking? I don't know. If you try to get in their minds the outcome is not known.
QUESTION: HAD THE NON-JUDICIAL FORECLOSURE ACTUALLY TAKEN PLACE BEFORE THEADOSIA AND BILL FILED THE COMPLAINT?)
I don't want this clown to dilute everything in the dispositive Motion for Summary Judgment by trying to make it look like a case that had just run off. Gone man gone.
They seem to be saying they can remove a Void Case to somewhere else. But, the new judge has no more authority that the old judge to remove a Void case to remove the case to to anywhere. I can't let them get away with that.
The case is VOID.
Unless the judge would have, during his review, come up with an actual Claim, from whatever character that the foreclosing party was now playing, of Injury in Fact. Then writing down his findings and filing the review into the docket at the beginning of the Defendant Foreclosing Party's first Answer, which was never even offered.
I have read the Defendant who through the magic of an Amended Complaint (which was so amended it changed the Plaintiff into the Defendant and the Defendant into the Plaintiff).
I agree with your conclusion the Foreclosing Party never mentioned a claim of having suffered an Injury in Fact. That doesn't work. In fact, at this point no one had standing as the Plaintiff, although the Borrower as a Plaintiff is analogous to a Defendant in the fraudulent non-judicial foreclosure litigation. This is due to the fact that 26 state legislatures have concluded letting a foreclosing party foreclose in a non-judicial setting without showing anything to anybody was not unconstitutional because even though they have kicked you out of you house without telling why or how, because you have the right to sue them to get your house back even though, they ruined your credit and left you homeless before you even started to get your house back.
Go Back to the Beginning of This Article
Go To Our YouTube Channel - @mrgfrd or contact us at mtgfrd.info@gmail.com For more information
