InvestorsHub Logo
icon url

Bizreader

03/25/15 6:03 PM

#418197 RE: HeadUp #418196

from that article: "And he has opened the door for RICO actions against the banks and individuals who did the bidding of the banks as well as the individuals who directed those actions."
icon url

footballref-8541

03/25/15 6:12 PM

#418200 RE: HeadUp #418196

I hope this guy has hired protection, he might end up in an obituary!!
icon url

boarddork

03/25/15 6:20 PM

#418202 RE: HeadUp #418196

Another 'Nate Thoma' appears for round II of the bankster dismantling, imo. WAMU theater is nearly over. Hope yall enjoyed the show. Hold on to them raffle tickets till the end. TIA, the management.
icon url

jhdf51

03/25/15 6:42 PM

#418204 RE: HeadUp #418196

Good stuff here...


This affidavit states that Chase Bank had purchased “certain assets and liabilities” of WAMU in the purchase transaction from the FDIC as receiver for WAMU in 2008. Chase Bank uses this affidavit ad museum to convince the court system in foreclosure cases that this affidavit somehow proves that Chase Bank purchased “every conceivable asset” of WAMU, so it must have standing in all cases involving homeowner loans originated through WAMU, or to put it simply that this proves Chase became a holder with rights to enforce or a holder in due course of the loan as defined by the Uniform Commercial Code. Antithetically, when it wants to sue the FDIC for a billion dollars… due to mounting expenses from the WAMU purchase transaction, it complains that the purchase agreement it signed didn’t really entail the purchase of “every asset and liability” of WAMU… Chase Bank claims this when it is to their advantage in a lawsuit to do so
icon url

bkshadow

03/25/15 6:50 PM

#418205 RE: HeadUp #418196

His August 2014 Appeal didn't go so well...

...as one would think these people would consider "just paying their monthly mortgage payments versus losing their jobs," regardless of who they work for.

...another "foreclosure deadbeat."

Hasn't made a mortgage payment since February of 2009?

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/08041401jss.pdf

Mains defaulted under the note and mortgage by failing to pay the monthly installments due under the note commencing February 1, 2009, and continuing thereafter. The loan was accelerated, and Citibank filed a complaint against Mains seeking a personal money judgment against him, foreclosure of the mortgage against the real estate, and an order for a sheriff’s sale of the real estate.



CONCLUSION
In light of the foregoing, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Affirmed.