Banks, Collectors, and CRAsDiscuss the elimationa of secured and unsecured "debt", as well as tactics for dealing with debt collectors and credit reporting agencies.
Print name and title of Respondent _______________________________________________
Respondent must timely complete and return this Disclosure Statement, along with all required do***ents referenced herein, as follows:
In care of:
_____________________________________, Notary Public
______________________________________
______________________________________
Respondent’s claim will be considered only if all portions of Debt Collector Disclosure Statement are completed and returned within the required time frame for response, with all required do***ents, specifically including the requisite verification made in accordance with law and codified in the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act at Title 15 USC §1692 et seq., which states in relevant part: “A debt collector may not use any false, deceptive, or misleading representation or means in connection with the collection of any debt,” which includes “the false representation of the character, or legal status of any debt” and “the threat to take any action that cannot legally be taken,” each of which is a violation of law. If Respondent does not respond as required by law. Respondent’s claim will not be considered, and Respondent may be liable for damages for any continued collection efforts and, or reporting of such accounts, as well as for other injury sustained by Secured Party. Please allow thirty (30) days for processing after receipt of Respondent’s response.
Honorably, through use of right to remedy.
WITHOUT RECOURSE, WITHOUT PREJUDICE
QM,If you are going to a foreclosure hearing, I advise two things:1. Make sure you hire your own court reporter to be there.2. Subpoena the ORIGINAL Note from the alleged Noteholder.
__________________ BEFORE YOU HIRE A LAWYER, READ THIS!
Don't be surprised if these guys attempt to evade culpability by simply ignoring what you sent them... then when you fax the proof of signature.. then they may just claim you sent them blank paper in an envelope.. not what you claimed you did... and now they have created reasonable doubt in the eyes of the black robes and the attorners in court. Can you prove you sent them what you claimed you did? Anyone can put blank paper in an envelope and send it certified mail with a return receipt. I'm not attacking your method.. but relaying a real world experience that I have had.. these guys play DIRTY.
I ran into this issue with 2 seperate banks so far in "doing battle" myself.
After that round.. I took a more concrete approach:
I had the do***ents notarized and had the notary make copeies.
I attached certificates of mailing to each of the do***ents in each package.
I had the post office rounddate each postmarked certificate and wrote the REGISTERED MAIL number on each of them.
Then I made copies of each of these pieces of paperwork at the coin op copy machine in the lobby before having the clerk seal the envelope and roundate their seal.. and then I made a copy of that.
Lo and behold.. this time they didn't try to evade. You may get off easy.. but don't count on it.. those guys are crooks and will play dirty. The more people become educated, the harder they will fight you. Gotta dot those "i's" and cross those "t's" and be ready to fight.
..J
__________________ Déjŕ vu in the iconography of our world is a warning of danger, a glitch in the Matrix. Something has changed.
QM,If you are going to a foreclosure hearing, I advise two things:1. Make sure you hire your own court reporter to be there.2. Subpoena the ORIGINAL Note from the alleged Noteholder.
in re 1. One step ahead of ya.
in re 2. That has been addressed in V & V demand of production
Quote:
Originally Posted by trooper2ls
Don't be surprised if these guys attempt to evade culpability by simply ignoring what you sent them... then when you fax the proof of signature.. then they may just claim you sent them blank paper in an envelope.. not what you claimed you did... and now they have created reasonable doubt in the eyes of the black robes and the attorners in court. Can you prove you sent them what you claimed you did? Anyone can put blank paper in an envelope and send it certified mail with a return receipt. I'm not attacking your method.. but relaying a real world experience that I have had.. these guys play DIRTY.
I ran into this issue with 2 seperate banks so far in "doing battle" myself.
After that round.. I took a more concrete approach:
I had the do***ents notarized and had the notary make copeies.
I attached certificates of mailing to each of the do***ents in each package.
I had the post office rounddate each postmarked certificate and wrote the REGISTERED MAIL number on each of them.
Then I made copies of each of these pieces of paperwork at the coin op copy machine in the lobby before having the clerk seal the envelope and roundate their seal.. and then I made a copy of that.
Lo and behold.. this time they didn't try to evade. You may get off easy.. but don't count on it.. those guys are crooks and will play dirty. The more people become educated, the harder they will fight you. Gotta dot those "i's" and cross those "t's" and be ready to fight.
..J
I had considered the possibility of them claiming they never received the do***ents hence return receipt, but it never dawned on me that they might claim to have received blank papers.
Indeed this would fly in the face of common sense, i.e. why pay to send plank papers, but these bastards operate by the rules of common sense.
My response would be to have them produce the alleged blank papers bearing my fingerprints, and if they cannot then nail them for destruction of evidence.
Thanks for the input.
well my t,s are dotted, and my i's are crossed. I'm going to bed.
__________________
"SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LEX ESTO" "Let the good of the People be the Supreme Law" JOHN LOCKE
What is done is done... possibly you can file an affidavit of service to boost your claim if they should try to pull a fast one. Here is an example:
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
State of Confusion )
)ss:
Some County )
I, John Henry, makes the following statement under penalties of perjury: The undersigned, your affiant is over the age of eighteen years and competent to testify; and has first hand knowledge of the facts testified to herein; and the facts are true, correct, complete, certain and not misleading.
On _______________________, your affiant caused a true, correct and complete copy of:
Private Request for Information, Notice of Fault and Notice of Need to Respond to be placed into an envelope addressed to the following parties and personally caused the envelopes to be mailed by Certified Mail and Certificates of Mailing to the following partys:
Crook #1, Title, at 123 Ripoff Street, Sometown, Some State 12232.
Further affiant saith naught.
______________________________________
John Henry
Before me, a Notary Public, appeared John Henry who making himself known to me did affirm and subscribe hereto on this ___ day of ____________, 2002.
______________________________________
Notary Public
My commission expires,
Good luck on your battle. May the force be with you!
__________________ Déjŕ vu in the iconography of our world is a warning of danger, a glitch in the Matrix. Something has changed.
QM,If you are going to a foreclosure hearing, I advise two things:1. Make sure you hire your own court reporter to be there.2. Subpoena the ORIGINAL Note from the alleged Noteholder.
Indeed pay particular attention to this intrepid homeowner. The statute was utilized to obtain a promise to produce the note. However that also demanded a recess in the proceedings and instead the homeowner got distracted into discussing appeal process - which of course was construed as consent to move the home into foreclosure anyway...
Pay particular attention to Paragraph "2" of the attached Foreclosure Notice. This is a recent Notice but you should be careful of attorneys sneaking in a notice that there is no original note. This could be construed by a foreclosure magistrate that no note is needed because the homeowner has been notified that "asset based feed-through certificates" have replaced the original note in bundling scams etc.
The notice, cleverly embedded in legaleze, a paragraph-long name for the alleged creditor, must be invalidated by a timely R4C in order for a homeowner to stand on the statute demanding original evidence of ownership at a subsequent foreclosure hearing.
Regards,
David Merrill.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoonra
It is worth noting that the fealty to the Pope, which you cited for its explicit mention of the Templar abbey in Dover, is the legal basis for the invalidation of the Magna Carta after it was sealed at Runnymede.
During discussion about the Treaty of 1213 and the Magna Charta (1215).
You are so right. This is from a case I did some research on. I just wonder how much it differs from mine. As they've never notified that their servicing my debt for someone else. This is from a case a lady has fought in bankruptcy court. Elaine Vincent Case # 07-40262.
Also another interesting case was won in NY recently.
This case shows progress is being made.
Mortgage Daily: N.Y. Foreclosure Case Sends Shockwaves - March 27, 2008
New York's Supreme Court has blocked a mortgage lender from foreclosing on a borrower who committed mortgage fraud because of violations to the state's predatory lending laws by the originating mortgage broker.
Sorry, this is the best link I can find for the case. Maybe someone can locate and post the actual Decision.
I think I forgot to mention that I did send back to them what they sent to me, but not until after I wrote across the front, "REFUSED FOR CAUSE WITHOUT DISHONOR" with a black sharpie
__________________
"SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LEX ESTO" "Let the good of the People be the Supreme Law" JOHN LOCKE
If you would have built a record in the cognizance of the US government somehow, you would be just like a "suitor" - a court of competent jurisdiction.
Indeed Courttroubles;
If one is ready to accept there is no Article III judiciary in operation down at the federal courthouse, then one is ready to sign and seal their own true judgment Libel of Review. One couple, the wife seemed ready to step up but her husband was still looking for some attorney somewhere who would not stab them in the back (again). I left them with advice to find out who the attorney was who moved Robert Boyko:
Stay away from anyone who thinks Congress holds the key to happiness. Congress has nothing to do with 'this Constitution." Article Iis not part of 'this Constitution.' Edit the Constitution forthe United States of America and find all references to "thisConstitution." "This Constitution" appears in every Article exceptArticle I. Article I is not part of "this Constitution," therefore Congress has authority only in federal territory.
Dr. Eduardo M. Rivera
The key is understanding Congress is the Administrator of the US court system. When the clerk of court was falsely branding suitors:
But as long as the husband is looking to saboutage the court system inherent in that household, I will not be accepting the Internet referral to walk this couple through LoR.
Regards,
David Merrill.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shoonra
It is worth noting that the fealty to the Pope, which you cited for its explicit mention of the Templar abbey in Dover, is the legal basis for the invalidation of the Magna Carta after it was sealed at Runnymede.
During discussion about the Treaty of 1213 and the Magna Charta (1215).
