What do ya know? Presentment of a Promissory Note

[Shoonra]

Keep in mind that all this was pursuant to an obligation of child support, possibly coaxed along with a court order.

If you think these word games will succeed in frustrating the law on child support you are in for a rude awakening.

The "presentment" of a promissory note is not payment nor a tender of payment for an existing obligation or debt. In fact, the promissory note effectively says that the debt is not going to be paid today. As such it constitutes a further extension of the indebtedness. For that reason, a promissory note cannot be forced on someone without their actual agreement (and this means more than just sending them the note in the mail or trying to slip it past their overworked salesclerk).

[courttroubles]

Hello,

You know some of these things are so dam confusing! You know its amazing in one's venture to find truth to all of this.

I joined this site a few months back. I've been a professional in the banking world for years and this site has opened my EYES to things UNKNOWN for me.

I on 4/4/08 served Citi with a complaint I intend to file. As since they got a lift of stay in bankruptcy court they've been saying they'd work with us on a modification.

In Dec I attempted to negoitate this with them. I did as requested showed that we're almost back to the income we once made. Did their harship letter. They continually even having this in hand started and stopped foreclosure against us. Since Feb I've gone from loss mit, to modification dept.

I in my complaint objected to their offer and sited various USC and FDCPA violations. I've been prejudiced in court with NO DIRECTION. Except go to STATE COURT. This puts me in the PLANTIFF POSITION.

When I sent in my complaint they had me as another rescheduled foreclosure. From April 1st to April 8th.
Once complaint was received they pulled any sale of my home. (TOTALLY DISAPPEARED FROM TRUSTEE SALE WEBSITE)

Then I get a letter dated 4/10/08 that I'm effectively rescheduled for a foreclosure in May now. I recently sent my complaint that I want to file to the MO div of Finance. Their apparently backed up as well.

My BIAS comes in from everything I read. While I understand the R4C a lot of people look at this as BS.
So I went with their method of typing my complaint that I think sounds pretty strong. So I was suprised with them rescheduling my sale again.

To me I'm so ANGRY for the INJUSTICES done to US AMERICAN'S I know the R4C is suppose to stop them in their tracks. However, I do wish to challenge and win in their court. This is because I know if necessary we should be able to get it to a point where I can get other evidence submitted possibly by getting others involved.

As to me every state may be a right to work state but where does state law overcome federal law? Shouldn't someone expect when hired if they ask ??? that they receive honest answers? After 2 1/2 yrs on the job I found out the company I worked for never had it in their contract to sell MORTGAGE NOTES for Chase. Just by chance for the same issue. The he said BS is mind boggling. The complaint I've actually written is BASED on the dam case I lost my job over. Also former Agency is owned and operated by like a conglomerate of attys.

To me they should have to pay for knowing they didn't know who owns my debt. I don't dispute my debts I dispute the way things have happened when the laws could of protected us more.

Since, we've been pretty much FORCED to represent OURSELVES I've been effectively looking for help for sometime. Some of the BEST CASES I've found are a case here in MO where someone was PREJUDICED as well. Oddly enough when I talked to this LEGAL AIDE person she told me I'd be LUCKY if 1 out of 10,000 bankruptcy attorneys know what their doing. Then the case I found that's alot like mine is written by this representative!

So I guess my ??? are is what constitues a false proof of claim in court? To me they knew they didn't know who owned my debt when they stopped the foreclosure sale. So them filng a proof of claim was false cause they knew from action outside of court who they were collecting for.

The judges final order was dismissed with prejudice because the assignment of mortgage that was presented to the court is blank. They have no clue who owns. He ordered no pymts post or prepetition to them.

Then atty dropped ball with adversary and complaint. Trustee did nothing when we told him of false POC. Atty even sent him a letter.

So I'm trying to come up with a good plan of attack since I can't find an attorney I went with cases won by a reputable consumer protection atty here in the USA.

So does anyone have any advice if I'd be better off to go for a TRO or just do the Subpoena Deuces Tecum with my complaint when I file?

All answers are appeciated!

[Livefire]

You might also consider incorporating the Deutsche Bank case into your briefs. Judge Boyko dismissed their foreclosure cases against 14 homewoners because they couldnt/wouldnt produce the original notes in court.

[courttroubles]

My case is just like those cases. Except I'm in a Non-judicial foreclosure state. And that I got them to prove they don't know who owns my 2nd mortgage.

Seriously my attorney stated we night be able to have the note purchased from a servicer whose been shown to not know who owns. But why pay a servicer **** if they lied from the word go about initial contracts we signed then when we tried to reinstate can't verify ownership of debt?

Here we can possibly get your mortgage note taken care of. Pay servicer. But we can't tell you if you pay us who were sending your money to.

Crazy!

[Lawdog]

Originally Posted by Livefire

You might also consider incorporating the Deutsche Bank case into your briefs. Judge Boyko dismissed their foreclosure cases against 14 homewoners because they couldnt/wouldnt produce the original notes in court.

That is INCORRECT, as can be seen by reading just the first page of the six page decision:

http://www.ohnd.uscourts.gov/Clerk_s...forclosure.pdf


Judge Boyko would not let the foreclosures go forward because the lenders could not produce proper MORTGAGE ASSIGNMENT papers showing that the debts had been sold.

The assignment is actually a third document, totally separate from the note and the mortgage. After one lender sells the debt to another, the selling lender executes an Assignment to the other, and the purchasing lender, if its people know anything at all about real estate, will record the Assignment in the deed records for the county where the property is, same as the original mortgage. That way, when the property is sold or refinanced, the new lender can verify who the payoff should be sent to. Incidentally, Boyko's order notes that Ohio law requires that assignments of mortgages be recorded in order to be enforceable.

Judge Boyko NEVER demanded that the banks produce the original notes. Again, the Federal Rules of Evidence allow for photocopies to be introduced into evidence, and Boyko is a federal court judge.

If your sole argument against your house being foreclosed on is "they can't produce the original note", you might as well start packing your bags. I defy anyone to produce a case where a lender lost solely because the original note could not be found.

[David Merrill]

Originally Posted by Livefire

You might also consider incorporating the Deutsche Bank case into your briefs. Judge Boyko dismissed their foreclosure cases against 14 homewoners because they couldnt/wouldnt produce the original notes in court.

And don't forget about O'Malley two weeks later. She must be a Mason (Daughter of the Eastern Star) - Huh Lawdog??

http://www.ohnd.uscourts.gov/Clerk_s...forclosure.pdf
http://www.ohnd.uscourts.gov/Clerk_s...Dismissals.pdf



Count them - thirty-two homeowners. That is Masonic code to Boyko that she can write her name in the snow too!



Regards,

David Merrill.