boxingwomansmallGet your gloves on and start training for the fight of your life because foreclosure defense is going to be no easy battle. Make no bones about it, you are definitely fighting against one of the toughest and most powerful opponents in the world. The banks

Let’s get one thing straight here ladies and gentleman. The banks have a lot of fighting muscle, political power money and world influence. Plus, they have trained every day for the last 200 plus years to be the #1 top heavy weight corporate contenders in the world. In fact they are so powerful, they don’t even need to don gloves or mouth pieces anymore. This will be no easy battle folks.

Like any fight , you must first look at your opponents weaknesses in order to exploit them and utilize these loop holes to your advantage. Over the years lenders and banks got fat and a little lazy in their training habits and fighting tactics. I guess they assumed that they would always rule the land from their hill top estates and glass houses.

Knocking homeowner, after homeowner out for the foreclosure count. Winning fight after fight.

You can call it cockiness. I call it plain stupid because the banks have made many mistakes in the laws which they tend to manipulate with their buckets of campaign money. Now, we are going shine a spot light on where they forgot to cover their bases and where you can steal some bases of your own and quite possibly home plate!

“An Informed Consumer is a Powerful Consumer” – Get Educated and Fight Back!

1. Truth in Lending Act (TILA) –

Does your loan have legal violations? Are you the victim of predatory lending? Did you know that 90% of victims do not even know they are victims? Discover how the Truth in Lending Act can help you with your mortgage or to stop foreclosure.

The federal Truth In Lending Act was originally enacted by Congress in 1968 as a part of the Consumer Protection Act. The law is designed to protect consumers in credit transactions by requiring clear disclosure of key terms of the lending arrangement and all costs.

This is the most abused laws by lenders and the one that has the most teeth.

Our company, Loan Safe Solutions, performs predatory lending mortgage audits for attorneys and consumers and we are finding legal violations on over 80% of the loans we review. Meaning, there is an 8 in 10 chance that the law has been violated on your mortgage and you might be able to use these legal violations to knock out your lender with a swift upper cut. You then can watch as the referee (the Judge) gives the 10 count.

Homeowners can use this defense even if they are not late on their mortgage and an effective tool to bring litigation against their lender or to mediate a loan modification.

This is one defense I am sure the lender funded Hope Now and non-profit, 995-Hope band of merry do gooders do not share with you as you call them for help. I know, because these same homeowners call us daily because they have been turned away by these same people and we use the forensic mortgage audit to discover Truth in Lending Act violations as our weapon of choice against “unhelpful” and “predatory” lenders or servicers.

Here are some very important Truth in Lending Act cases that the banks are shaking in the ring as they wait for the fights to start.

Class Action Under the Truth in Lending Act

Andrews v. Chevy Chase Bank, FSB (2007 WL 112568, E.D. Wisconsin, January 16, 2007). Borrowers alleged that the lender: (1) failed to properly disclose the payment schedule because the schedule did not reflect that the required payments were due monthly; (2) did not clearly disclose the APR and variable rate feature, based in part on disclosures reflecting a note rate of 1.950% and a five year fixed period that applied to the payment and not the rate; (3) added information to the TILA disclosure that was not directly related to the information required to be disclosed (i.e., the initial discounted interest rate of 1.950% set forth as the note rate); and (4) failed to properly disclose the possibility of negative amortization.

The federal district court agreed with the first three allegations and determined that the loan was rescindable because of the violations. The court further determined that this matter was appropriate for class certification, finding nothing in the language of the TILA that precludes the use of the class action mechanism to obtain a judicial declaration of whether a TILA error entitles each member of the class individually to seek rescission.

The MBA and other industry trade groups have 2 filed an amici curiae brief requesting that the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit overturn the class certification.
Right to Rescind After Loan Pay-Off

Barrett v. JP Morgan Chase Bank, N.A. (445 F.3d 874, 6th Cir., April 18, 2006). The borrowers refinanced their mortgage with Bank One in May 2000 and again in January 2001. In May 2001, the borrowers refinanced the loan with another lender, and Bank One released its security interest in their home. The borrowers requested that the Bank One loans be rescinded based on alleged TILA violations.

Bank One responded that because both loans were refinanced, and the security interest released, there was nothing left to rescind. The district court agreed, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed.

The Sixth Circuit stated that nothing in the TILA or its implementing regulations provides that the act of refinancing extinguishes an unexpired right to rescind, and that the right to rescind gives consumers the right to recover fees in addition to the right to the release of the security interest.

2. Challenge the Ownership of Your Note –

Does your lender really own your mortgage? Are you sure? Why don’t you make them prove it?

Aaron Krowne and I first broke the story about the Ohio ruling in which Judge Christopher A. Boyko of the Eastern Ohio United States District Court, on October 31, 2007 dismissed 14 Deutsche Bank-filed foreclosures in a ruling based on lack of standing for not owning/holding the mortgage loan at the time the lawsuits were filed.

Judge Boyko issued an order requiring the Plaintiffs in a number of pending foreclosure cases to file a copy of the executed Assignment demonstrating Plaintiff (Deutsche Bank) was the holder and owner of the Note and Mortgage as of the date the Complaint was filed, or the court would enter a dismissal.

April Charney, a powerful legal aid attorney and foreclosure defense pioneer in Jacksonville Florida said this about the Ohio rulings, “This court order is what I have been saying in my cases. This is rampant fraud on every court in America or non-judicial foreclosure fraud where the securitized trusts are filing foreclosures when they never own/hold the mortgage loan at the commencement of the foreclosure.”Charney said, “That means that the loans are clearly in default at the time of any eventual transfer of the ownership of the mortgage loans to the trusts. This means that the loans are being held by the originating lenders after the alleged “sale” to the trust despite what it says per the pooling and servicing agreements and despite what the securities laws require.

“This also means that many securitized trusts don’t really, legally own these bad loans.”

She went on to say, “In my cases, many of the trusts try to argue equitable assignment that predates the filing of the foreclosure, but a securitized trust cannot take an equitable assignment of a mortgage loan. It also means that the securitized trusts own nothing.”

Now, this is quickly becoming a preferred punch of choice used by cleverly trained homeowners and aggressive heavy weight attorneys to bring lenders to their knees with a swift jab to the chin during the foreclosure process.

I can almost guarantee that your lender or servicer will not want to see you in the foreclosure ring if you have been training using the above fighting techniques.