RajaPresentation1x
-
Upload
leonidas-desparta -
Category
Documents
-
view
102 -
download
0
Transcript of RajaPresentation1x
Indy Mac Bank FSB (Seller/Sponsor)
Mortgage loans Cash
Indy Mac MBS Inc Indy Mac ABS Inc
Depositor
LOANS
Certificates
Indy Mac INDX mortgage loan-2006AR8 Issuing Entity
Deutsche Bank converted these Notes into Certificates/Bonds
Lehman Brothers Inc Security Underwriter Certificates
Cash
Offered Certificates
Cash
Dealers/Agents
INVESTORS
Cash
Offered Certificates
THE TRANSACTION PARTIES Indy Mac INDX Mortgage Loan-2006AR8
The Mortgage Loans were Traded/Sold for $ by the Entities involved without
borrower’s knowledge
ISSUING ENTITITY WAS ESTABLISHED BY DEPOSITORS
The borrower signs a note that is never actually
given to the investor.
& The investor
receives a mortgage bond or actually evidence
of a mortgage bond that was
never disclosed, seen or signed by
the borrower.
PARTIES INVOLVED IN TRANSACTION
The Transaction Parties Indy Mac Bank FSB originated substantially all of the mortgage loans and currently services all of the mortgage loans. Prior to the closing
date(5/31/2006), the sponsor(Indy Mac Bank FSB) purchased all of the mortgage loans from the originators(Indy Mac Bank FSB). On the closing date sponsor sold the mortgage loans to the depositor (Indy Mac MBS Inc & Indy Mac ABS Inc) for cash, Depositor in turn deposited them into a New York common law trust(Indy
Mac INDX Mortgage Loan Trust-2006AR8 as per pooling and servicing agreement, dated as of the cut-off date(05/01/2006) which is the issuing entity and the issuing
entity converted these loans into certificates/Bonds. The issuing entity gave these certificate/Bonds to Depositor, who sold them to
Lehman Brothers the securities underwriter The Certificates/Bonds were sold by the Depositor(Indy Mac MBS Inc& Indy Mac
ABS Inc)to the Security Underwriter (Lehman Brothers Inc) for cash. The Security Underwriter(Lehman Brothers Inc) sold these certificates to Investors
through the Dealers and Agents for cash. The TRUE Sale is from the Depositor, (Indy Mac MBS & Indy Mac ABS) to the
Securities Underwriter, Lehman Brothers and not to TRUSTEE.
SECURITIZATION FLOW CHART
Indy Mac Bank FSB Originator/Sponsor/Seller
Indy Mac MBS Inc & Indy Mac ABS Inc DEPOSOTOR (Created Issuing Entity)
CASH Mortgage
Loans
Indy Mac INDX Mortgage Loan 2006AR8
ISSUING ENTITY CONVERTED LOANS TO CERTIFICATES/BONDS
OFFERED CERTFICATES
Mortgage Related
documents
Created by
the
Depositors
Lehman Brothers Inc Securities Underwriters
Offered Certificates
CASH
DEALERS AGENTS
CASH
CASH CASH
Certificates/Bon
ds
Certificates/Bond
s
INVESTORS
Certificates/Bonds
Certificates/Bonds
CASH
Borrowers RAJAS
BROKER GREENWAY
ORIGINATOR Indy Mac Bank FSB
SPONSOR Indy Mac Bank FSB
SELLER Indy Mac Bank FSB
DEPOSITOR Indy Mac MBS Inc Indy Mac ABS Inc
ISSUING ENTITY
Indy Mac INDX Loan Trust-2006AR8
SECURITIES UNDERWRITER (Lehman Brothers Inc)
(Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc) (Lehman Brothers special
Financing Inc)
DEALERS
AGENTS
INVESTORS
Loan application
BAD LOAN
LOANS
CASH
LOAN DOCUMENTS
Certificates/Bonds
Yield Spread
Premimums
Cer
tifi
cate
s/B
on
ds
CA
SH
Cer
tifi
cat
es/B
on
ds CA
SH
CER
TIFI
CA
TES/
BO
ND
S
CA
SH
NEXT SLIDE WILL EXPLAIN ABOUT
Chronology of the Events What Happened
Indy Mac Bank FSB Servicer
SOME EXHIBITS OF 8K SHOWING DEEP INVOLVEMENT
OF LEHMAN BROTHERS Inc
LEHMAN BROTHERS HOLDINGS INC LEHMAN BROTHERS SPECIAL FINANCING
INC
8K EXHIBIT-99.2 FILED WITH SEC, FILE #333-132042-07, ACCESSION # 905148-6-4445, FILED ON 06/15/2006 , SHOWING “LEHMAN BROTHERS TRANSACTION”
Exhibit-99.2 of 8K
Transaction Between
Deutsche Bank &
Lehman Brothers Special Financing
Inc On 05/31/2006
Lehman Brothers
Lehman Brothers Special
Financing Inc
PARTY-A In the Deal
Deutsche Bank
Party-B In the Deal
PAYMENT INSTRUCTION
IN US $ In Deutsche Bank
Account#01419663
GLOBAL DEAL ID #
Signed BY
DEUTSCHE BANK
Signed BY
Lehman Brothers Special
Financing Inc
EXHIBIT 99.3
Of 8K
LEHMAN BROTHERS TRANSACTION DATED 06/14/2006
Trust
Filed On
SEC Accession #
SEC File#
Transaction between Deutsche Bank and Lehman Brothers
Transaction Date
06/14/2006
TRADE Date
Is 05/23/2
006
Payment to Lehman Brothers
IN Account #066-
143543 JP Morgan Chase
Bank
Payment to Deutsche Bank
In Account# 01419663
Signed by Deutsche
Bank Signed by Lehman Brothers
Another Lehman Brother’s Transaction
Exhibit-99.4 of 8K
Lehman Brother’s Transaction dated 06/14/2006
Deutsche Bank
& Lehman Brothers
Deutsche Bank Account# 01419663
Signed by Lehman Brothers
SHOWING INVOLVEMENT OF INDY MAC MBS & INDY MAC ABS as “DEPOSITORS”
Exhibit-99.5 of 8K Shows
involvement of Indy Mac MBS &
Indy Mac ABS As DEPOSITORS
Indy Mac MBS &
Indy Mac ABS As Depositor sold Mortgage Backed Securities & Asset Backed Securities
to Lehman Brothers for CASH
Indy Mac Bank FSB Originator
Sponsor
Seller
Indy Mac MBS Inc
Indy Mac ABS Inc
DEPOSITORS
LEHMAN BROTHERS
Securities
Dealers & Agents
Investors
AB
IG T
RA
NSF
ER O
F W
EALT
H B
Y FR
AU
D
Indy Mac INDX
Mortgage Loan Trust 2006AR8 (Deutsche
Bank) Deutsche Bank just converted loans into
certificates/Bonds
Loan File
Certificates/Bon
ds
Exhibit-99.6 of 8K
Guaranty of Payments by
Lehman Brothers
Guaranty of Lehman Brothers
For Payments to
Deutsche Bank
GUARANTY OF LEHMAN BROTHERS
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS WHAT HAPPENED
They created SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) Issued Certificates Got the certificate rated (AAA) Bought the Credit Default Swaps (30 bets on each loan) Sold Certificates to Investors (CREDITORS) who ARE SPREAD OUT ACROSS THE WORLD? Collected/aggregated the money from the investors (Money went to the aggregator) Aggregator placed demand down line on the Securitization Chain to Mortgage Brokers
that he needs 100 million dollars loans or so and here are the terms of the loans in category ( At this point they did not have any loan, so they created TRANCHES A,B,C etc. without the loan). In other words they were selling forward which means they were selling what they did not have.
They attached the Spread sheets with the documents, referred them as populated data by sample data, which was false and said will be replaced with the actual loans, which were fictional at this time.
So they placed the demand to the brokers, who could not satisfy the demand then the aggregator created different companies to originate loans in mass production without caring about any criteria whether the borrowers qualify for loan or not. At this point the money is still with the aggregator
NEXT SLIDE
Now they signed Pooling and Servicing Agreement(PSA) and Assignment Assumption Agreements
Now the Aggregator funds the loan from the money he received from the investor by selling the certificates (They sold forward and sold a thing which they did not own). The aggregator sent the various false dubious reports and the accuracy of those dubious reports is questionable. He filled some false data and said will be replaced or changed later, which they did as they have the passwords and can log in any time and the change the data as per their fraudulent wishes and requirements using MERS or internal devices. They have MERS and a Shadow MERS, whether you have MERS or not still you have effects of MERS. They replaced the data with the false information as per their own wishes through MERS.
These Trustees and Service Companies or others is just a need to funnel them to make sure that it rarely happens that the same property or the same borrower have been foreclosed upon at same time by more than one supposed lender. They do not know who owns the loan and do not care. They only care that two people do not make claim to do that at the same time on the same property
Then they created these outsourcing companies for foreclosure services (LPS, FIS, DOCEX etc.) to fabricate the documents to show that Deutsche Bank is the Owner of the loan, when in fact way before when Deutsche Bank entered into the picture, the security was sold to the investor thereby locking in all rights under the Assignment and Assumption Agreement and Pooling and Servicing Agreement, before even the loan took place or the borrower signed the settlement papers and borrowers did not know this and none of these entities disclosed this to the borrower, which gives the borrowers extended rights for rescission
By operation of law these already existed and money changed hands. When borrowers signed the loan papers, the borrowers signed with the investor and this was not disclosed to the borrowers.
You cannot execute any other document after the sale to investor, every other document in place is fixed and no one has authority without going to all the investors for permission and none of these thieves went to the investors and many of these thieves do not know the whereabouts of the investors.
Deutsche Bank was so down and dirty as to be lying directly for their position.
So all foreclosures are knocked down until they come out with the truth (WHICH IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR THEM BECAUSE THEY ARE ACTING ULTRA VIRUS)
Note that the issuance of the bonds/notes are “non-recourse” which further corroborates the fact that the issuer (SPV/REMIC) is NOT the debtor, it is the homeowners who were funded out of the pool of money solicited from the investors, part of which was used to fund mortgages and a large part of which was kept by the investment bankers as “profit.” (YIELD SPREAD PREMIMUM TIER-II)There is no language indicative that anyone other than the investors owns the notes from homeowner/borrowers/debtors. Thus the investors are the creditors and the homeowners are the debtors. Without the investors there would have been no loan. Without the borrowers, there would have been no investment. Hence, a SINGLE TRANSACTION.
1 BORROWER
Greenway
Indy Mac Bank FSB Originator/Sponsor/Seller
INVESTORS
MBS ABS
1
2
3
4
4
5
5
6
7
8 9
Borrower signs a note to ABC Corp., which says it is the lender but isn’t. So you start right away with the wrong party named on the note and mortgage (deed of trust) PLUS the use of a meaningless nominee on the mortgage (deed of trust) which completely invalidates the documents and clouds the title.
Meanwhile the lender gets a mortgage bond NOT SIGNED BY THE BORROWER.
(borrower signed a note but the lender received a bond from a party not involved in the borrower’s closing, it all falls into place) The bond says that this new “entity” (which usually they
never bothered to actually form) will pay them from “receivables.” The receivables include but ARE NOT LIMITED TO the payments from the borrower who accepted funding of a loan.
These other parties are there to justify the fact that the loan was sold at a huge premium to the lender without disclosure to either the borrower or the lender. (The tier 2 Yield Spread Premium that raises some really juicy causes of action under TILA, RESPA and the 10b-5 actions, including treble damages, attorney fees and restitution).
There is no nexus between borrower and lender without recognizing the obvious — there were parties, documents, agreements and
corresponding duties and obligations existing in the UNDISCLOSED MIDDLE.
The common thread is they were lying. They lied when they said these were AAA rated
liquid investments based upon industry standard underwriting standards for residential mortgages
They lied when they said this property is worth more than the principal that was borrowed.
They lied when they said these loans are in default They lied when they said they were giving a
complete accounting for the transaction They lied when they said “I have personal
knowledge” And they are lying now when they say the contents
of the fraudulent documents are true but the person was wrong.
It is as simple as this — the borrower signed a note and the lender received a bond. Those are two different things. If you let them continue with this fraud you are giving houses to brokers who never put up a dime for the funding of the loan.
True Sale Prospectus Page S-107
Deutsche Bank cannot be Trustee or own the
Note
PSA Section 2.01
True Sale from Indy Mac MBS to
Lehman Brothers Traded for $
PROSPECTUS Indy Mac
INDX Mortgage
Loan Trust-2006AR8
Motion to substitute
Deutsche Bank for Indy Mac Bank FSB was
false The court was
misled and FRAUD UPON COURT WAS COMMITTED Para “4” of
Motion
LEHMAN BROTHERS
Page S-107 of the Prospectus 424(b)5 says under “ METHOD OF DISTRIBUTION” Subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Underwriting Agreement between the depositor and Lehman Brothers Inc (“Lehman or the Underwriter”) the depositor (Indy Mac MBS & Indy Mac ABS) has agreed to sell the offered certificates to the underwriter(Lehman) and underwriter(Lehman) has agreed to purchase from the Depositor(Indy Mac MBS,ABS) the offered certificates. The Lehman Brothers then sold to Investors through the Dealers and Agents.(THE TRUE SALE IS FROM DEPOSITOR TO UNDERWRITER & NOT TO
TRUSTEE)
THE TRUE SALE IS FROM DEPOSITOR TO SECURITIES UNDERWRITER & NOT TO TRUSTEE
ADMISSION.. Indy Mac Bank FSB> Indy Mac MBS> Lehman Brothers
Deutsche Bank
admits that the
beneficial owners of
these loans are
investors & trustee
does not itself have
an economic interest in the loans
A corporate trustee for the mortgage backed securities (MBS) only
serves an administrative role, but has no
ownership stake nor beneficial interest in the underlying loans of the
securitization.
A Claim of Champerty & Maintenance
The Attorney Representing Deutsche Bank, must disclose who is signing his Pay Check and from
where the checks are coming?
DEUTSCHE BQANK has “NO ECONOMIC” Interest in Legal proceedings and in the loans., Nor Does it initiate FORECLOSURE PROCEEDINGS or Mortgage properties in FORECLOSURE
All foreclosures in the name of the defunct trust are bogus – the loan has been long likely sold to a
very unfriendly hedge fund. This is aside from
the fact of no proper documentation to the
original SPV the foreclosure attorney claims to represent.
Constitute a claim of Champerty & Maintenance
Under the TRUSTEE; DEUTSCHE BANK SAYS
” Performs a variety of functions, among them acting as TRUSTEE for the Securitization Trust and sometimes CUSTODIAN FOR THE MORTGAGE DOCUMENTS. A corporate trustee for the mortgage backed securities (MBS) only serves an administrative role, but has no
ownership stake nor beneficial interest in the underlying loans of the securitization.
ROLE OF TRUSTEE IN A FORECLOSURE
Deutsche Bank in its capacity as trustee holds certain mortgage loans for MBS transactions. The BENEFICIAL OWNERS of these loans are INVESTORS in MBS, typically large institutions such as pension funds, mutual funds and insurance companies. Although the trustee of
MBS is legal owner of record of mortgage loans. THE TRUSTEE DOES NOT ITSELF HAVE AN ECONOMIC INTEREST IN THE LOANS. Moreover the trustee is only NOMINALLY involved in
the foreclosure process.
This is in direct contradiction to actual testimony and proffers by counsel in the courtroom. Both the investors and the borrowers were cheated and defrauded through
outright lies, deception and hundreds of pages of documents with conflicting provisions.
Pooling and Servicing
Agreement dated
05/01/2006 Also
Support that The “MOTION
TO SUBSTITUTE” Deutsche Bank
for Indy Mac Bank FSB is based on
Falsification, misleading the
court & FRAUD UPON COURT by the
Attorneys PARA “4” of the
motion
How these attorneys, misled the court with the Fake, fabricated and illegal assignment after 1129 Days, in
VIOLATION of PSA, PROSPECTUS and REMIC??
Para “ 4 “ of Motion to Substitute Deutsche Bank False
The on
the Note is not legal
Indy mac bank FSB
Indy Mac MBS/ABS
Inc
Lehman Brothers
Inc Dealers
Agents
Investor
Prospectus Page S-107
PaGE-43 OF PSA
PAGE-44 OF PSA
Attorneys Misled the Court,
Falsified &
Committed Fraud Upon Court
In Motion to Substitute
Deutsche Bank For Indy Mac on
07/09/2009 PARA-4 of the Motion
FALSIFICATION& HID TRUE FACTS FROM THE COURT
“The Sanction of Dismissal is warranted in this Case. Defendants have filed many documents with the Court in complete disregard of the truth or falsity of their factual underpinnings. Under the Court’s general civil contempt powers, the Court is authorized and entitled to sanction the BANKS’s misconduct and those who assisted in this fraud in concealing known fraud abuses. The Defendants knew what was going on and had total disregard for the consequences
COURT can ask these Attorneys WHY
FALSIFICATION OF
TRUE FACTS
No Mortgage can be added in the Trust after the Cut off
date(05/01/2006) BUT
This Fake, Fabricated and illegal assignment
was executed on 06/04/2009
AFTER 1129 DAYS
Which is a violation of PSA, Prospectus and
REMIC
This was signed by Ms. Erica A. Johnson Seck, who has been noticed
by various courts for her involvement in Frauds & on each
document her signatures were not identical
Indy Mac Bank FSB was inactive institution as of
07/11/2008
Capacity to maintain Judicial Action is and was QUESTIONABLE
Indy Mac federal bank FSB was created on 07/11/2008 & was an Inactive institution from
07/11/2008 t0 03/19/2009 and was under receivership of FDIC ( It was created as a Bridge
Bank
Indy Mac
Federal Bank FSB
Was a Bridge Bank
1) Closing with the borrower took place in the middle of the chain of securitization and within the context of the securitization documents executed without the borrower, before the borrower existed even as a prospective customer for the loan product.
2) The assignment is near the end of the securitization chain in practice, contrary to the usual conditions and prohibitions contained in the original enabling documents that created the securitization structure and process
3) The “assignment” is barred by a cutoff date in the securitization documents.
4) Thus even if there is an assignment, it is fake, fabricated and illegal and cannot be accepted.
5) “Trustee” under an alleged securitization structure that a party making a claim on an assignment is unaware of the absence of acceptance or even that there is no authority for the Trustee to accept the assignment.
UNDERSTANDING THE EVOLVING PROCESS
1. First transactions that occurred was the sale of securities to unsuspecting investors. 2. The second transaction that occurred was that the investor money was put into an
account at an investment banking firm. 3. Third transaction was that the investment banker divided the money between 4. Fourth transaction was the closing with the borrower. (YSP created, hidden fees, NO
DISCLOSURE) 5. The fifth was the assignment AND ACCEPTANCE of the loan (See below) into between 1
and 3 6. The sixth was the receipt of insurance or counter-party payments on behalf of the pool
pursuant to the documents creating the securitization structure. 7. The seventh was the re-securitization of the pooled assets many times. 8. The eighth was the federal bailout payments and receipts allocable to the balances owed
on the loans that were claimed to be part of the pool. 9. The ninth is the foreclosures by parties who never handled any money who allegedly
represent investors who no longer have any interest in the loan By definition, the documents creating the securitized pool usually prohibit such an assignment from being accepted into the pool. Therefore, although an assignment was executed, it is entirely possible that it accomplished nothing of legal consequence.
OPPOSING PARTY NEEDS TO PROVE
1. The putative creditor in case at bar is claiming their standing by virtue of an assignment. (Their Own Documents BAR Them)
2. Assignment only exists by virtue of a larger structure of securitization in which the documents describe the conditions under which such an assignment is acceptable and further conditions if the loans ceases to perform.
3. . Provisions requiring insurance, credit default swaps, credit enhancements, and others add co-obligors to the borrower’s transaction which takes place not at the beginning of the chain, but rather in the middle of the chain.
4. Closing documents between loan originators, servicers, Special Purpose Vehicles, aggregators, etc. including the pooling and services agreement, the assignment and assumption agreement, the Master Services Agreement [if separate], none of which includes the borrower as party or references any specific debtor or borrower because the debtor is unknown when the securitization structure is created
5. There is a steadfast refusal to respond appropriately to a qualified written request or a debt verification letter
6. There is a steadfast refusal to respond to discovery. 7. It has repeatedly been shown that the intermediary parties in securitization have
clearly fabricated the documents of transfer solely for the purpose of supporting their position in litigation based on falsification, misleading the court.
8. The intermediary securitization parties steadfastly refused to account for third-party payments.
MORE FAKE ASSIGNMENTS
BY Erica A. Johnson
ON NEXT
SLIDES
Not Identical
Signatures of Notary Also not Identical
She is signing for Deutsche Bank, but does not work for
Deutsche Bank
Vice President for
Deutsche Bank??
Here she became
VP One west Bank FSB Compare these
signatures with the previous
These signatures are
also not Identical
MORE FAKE ASSIGNMENTS
BY Erica A. Johnson
ON NEXT
SLIDES
Another Different
Signatures
Please see the
signature &
Compare with her
other signatures
The signatures are also not
identical
Please compare her
signatures With the
other Assignments
Executed By her
More Different
Signatures
Notarization Without
Erica A. Johnson’s signatures ??????
Another Different Signature
s ????
Another Different
Signatures
HERE Ms. Erica A.
Johnson Seck Signing for
MERS As
Vice President &
She Does not work
For MERS
??? Mr. Troy Lazzara’s
Signatures Not
Identical
Compare his signatures with the others??
ALTE ALTER EGO DOCTRINE: ‘Pierce the Corporate Veil’
CORPORATE HATS
piercing the corporate veil has to do with the corporation through it’s officers and through the board of directors NOT acting in
compliance with the corporation articles of incorporation and corporate bylaws require. And when they do that, they do that at
the peril of the officers and the board of directors.
Another Lady Christina Allen was used by Indy Mac Bank FSB, Indy Mac MBS Inc, Indy Mac ABS Inc, Indy Mac Bank Securities, One West Bank FSB, MERS, Lehman Brothers family (Lehman Brothers Inc, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc, Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc) and Deutsche Bank Securities and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company et al. She was wearing too many hats for Financial and non-financial institutions, the assignments/Affidavits signed by her are shown in next few slides MS. CHRISTINA ALLEN IS NOT WORKING FOR ANY OF THE ABOVE ENTITIES . She is working as a CLERK for “LPS” LENDING PROCESSING SERVICES
1. On 12/03/2008 signed as AVP of Indy Mac Bank FSB, a deceased unit as per FDIC Certificate # 29730 & OTS Order # 24-2008 both dated in a case in Loudoun County Circuit Court case no. CL-55523, submitted by attorneys, Mr. Joseph F. Cunningham, Mr. Eric P. Burns and Mr. Thomas K. Tessmer, representing Deutsche Bank.
2. On 12/03/2008 signed as AVP of Indy Mac Bank FSB, a deceased unit as per FDIC Certificate # 29730, in a case in United States bankruptcy Court Eastern District of Virginia Alexandria Division case no. 08-18049-SSM, submitted by Ms. Diann E. Green (wife of Mr. Eric P. Burns)
3. On 02/09/2009 signed as Attorney in Fact for JP Morgan Chase Bank National Association. This affidavit was submitted in Fair Fax County Court by the attorney Shapiro 7 Burson LLP in a case of Mr. Baker.
4. Signed as Assistant Secretary for MERS and as nominee for Indy Mac Bank FSB 5. Signed on 09/04/2008 as Attorney in Fact for HSBC Mortgage services, Inc. 6. Signed as Assistant Secretary for Indy Mac Bank FSB a deceased financial institution. 7. Signed for MERS as nominee for Flick Mortgage Investors Inc. 8. Signed as Assistant Secretary for MERS and as nominee for Indy Mac Bank FSB 9. Signed as Assistant Secretary MERS, as nominee for Indy Mac Bank FSB 10. Signed as vice President Option One Mortgage Corporation. 11. Again signed as vice president for MERS and as nominee for Indy Mac Bank FSB 12. Signed as Assistant Secretary for MERS and as nominee for Indy Mac Bank FSB a deceased financial
institution. 13. “Mortgage assignments are being created out of whole cloth just for the purposes of showing a
transfer from one entity to another,” it has become impossible to establish when a mortgage was sold, and to whom, so the servicers (Indy Mac Bank FSB now One West Bank FSB) are trying to recreate the paperwork as per instructions from DEUTSCHE BANK, right down to the stamps that financial companies use to verify when a note has changed hands.
Indy Mac Bank FSB never existed on
12/03/2008 &
it was a deceased and inactive institution as
Of 07/11/2008
FDIC Certificate No.29730
& OTS Order
N0. 24-2008 Both dated 07/11/2008
A Tale of Too Many HATS
Here CHRISTINA Allen
Signs for JP Morgan Chase
National Association
A TALE OF
TOO MANY HATS ???
Here She signs for HSBC
Mortgage Services,Inc
On 09/04/2008
But She signed for Indy Mac Bank
FSB On
12/03/2008 ???
A TALE OF
TOO MANY HATS
?
Here she is signing for
Money tree financial
Corporation MERS
& Indy Mac Bank FSB
A Tale of
TOO,TOO MANY HATS
??? ?? ?
Here she signs For
MERS Quicken Loans
& Indy Mac Bank FSB
A Tale of Too
Many HATS ???? ??? ?? ?
For MERS
Indy Mac Bank FSB &
Deutsche Bank National Trust
A Tale of Too, Many
HATS
VP &
Asst. Secretary
A TALE OF
TOO MANY HATS
Wearing Hats For
Indy Mac Bank FSB Deutsche
Bank Washington Mutual Bank
& Long Beach Mortgage Company
Too, Many HATS
For MERS
Quicken Loans Inc &
Indy Mac Bank FSB As
Vice president
A Tale of Uncountable
HATS
MERS Indy Mac Bank FSB
Casa Blanca Mortgage
Inc Shearson Mortgage
Casa Blanca Mortga
ge Inc
For MERS
Flick Mortgage Investors Inc
& Indy Mac Bank FSB
This assignment after the
Foreclosure sale was recorded
By Ms. Diann E. Green Esq.
Please see the signature of this
Notary On the next
SLIDE ?
Why the signature of the Notary are not identical
The Answer lies with the Attorney, whose signatures
were notarized?????
Same Notary With
Different Signatures & Different
Attorney Mr. Thomas K. Tessmer Esq.
The mystery of these different signatures can
be solved By
Ms. Diann E. Green Esq.
& Mr. Thomas K. Tessmer Esq.
Both are working for the same Law Firm
The signature
of this Notary are
not identical on each
document ?????
Same Notary with another different
signature Answer to these lies
with only two Diann E. Green Esq
& Thomas K.Tessmer Esq.
It appears that someone is using the stamp of this
Notary It raises a question
which need to be solved
Same Attorney &
Same Notary WITH
Different Signature LOOKS LIKE
SOMEONE IS USING NOTARY STAMP
WITHOUT THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE
NOTARY ????? ???? ??? ?? ?
HISTORY REPEATES
ITSELF
Same Attorney &
Same Notary Again with Different Signature
Who is using the
Notary Stamp
?
Same Attorney
& Same Notary
& Every time
with Different Signature
?
WHO IS GOING TO SOLVE THIS
???
???? ???
? Thomas K. Tessmer Esq.
Diann E. Green Esq.
NOTARY
Mr. Roger Stotts Vice President
OF Deutsche Bank
Was found signing
DIFFERENT IN
NEXT SLIDE ???
This Instrument was also recorded by Mr.
Thomas K. Tessmer Esq. &
Diann E. Green Esq. THEY MIGHT HAVE AN
ANSWER Please See the other Signatures of Mr. Roger Stotts on
next Slide
Please see and Compare the signatures of Mr. Roger Stott on the previous (51) and on
Next slide (53)
This was recorded by Diann E. Green & Thomas
K. Tessmer
A BIG TRANSFER
OF WEALTH
BY FRAUD
???
Deutsche Bank et al
WHO RECORDED THIS
INSTRUMENT IN
LOUDOUN COUNTY
LAND RECORDS
ANSWER Ms. Diann E. Green Esq.
& Mr. Thomas K. Tessmer Esq.
Diann E. Green Esq. &
Thomas K. Tessmer Work for this Firm
A lady Ms. Erica A.
Johnson Seck Fond of Too Many
HATS &
Every Time She Signs
Different
WHY
FRAUD CLOSURE
This Instrument was recorded BY
Diann E. Green Esq.
Thomas K
Tessmer Esq
NOTARY
Please Solve This ???
Notary Stamp
Was used by ?
Without Notary’s
Knowledge &
Permission
Please See the
Signature of
This Notary On the
Next Slide
We have to solve this
THE SIGNATURE
OF THIS
NOTARY ARE NOT
IDENTICAL
Deutsche Bank is being accused of similar activity to Goldman Sachs. The German bank's sizable business in structuring CDOs make it a prime target for U.S. investigators, who are now broadening their search. Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/winners-losers-goldman-sec-charges-2010-4#loser-deutsche-bank-12#ixzz0mGfm98vF
Here the largest (by far)
originator of foreclosure
process in the country who is
now doing so in its own name is,
in writing,. disclaiming any
interest, ownership or rights to the
loans, much the same as MERS.
& This is in direct contradiction to actual testimony and proffers by counsel in the
courtroom.
Deutsche Bank
A KING
Of F O R E C L O S U R E
HOW MUCH DEUTSCHE BANK RECEIVED
2.8 Billion + 5.7 Billion = 8.5 Billion Deutsche Bank also received money from Different Insurance companies
Rule 10b-5: Employment of Manipulative and Deceptive Practices By Deutsche Bank et al It shall be unlawful for any person, directly or indirectly, by the use of any means or instrumentality of interstate commerce, or of the mails or of any facility of any national securities exchange, (a) To employ any device, scheme, or artifice to defraud, (b) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or to omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading, or (c) To engage in any act, practice, or course of business which operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit upon any person, In connection with the purchase or sale of any security.” — the violation of 10b-5 is blatant. This is why Goldman Sachs is going to have a hard time defending this case. There is a big “Light” on Wall Street – DEUTSCHE BANK et al, accommodated, conspired, and executed a deceptive and fraudulent act – A company can not isolate a transaction and the employee – from Fraud – done in the name of Deutsche Bank et al.
DEUTSCHE BANK PEELING BACK THE LAYERS
“”You cannot be a Trustee or investor or own the note, lest it become a partnership with the certificate holders”
Deutsche Bank is also acting under the various layers 424(b) (5) Prospectus, Pooling & Servicing Agreement (PSA) filed by the “KING OF FORECLOSURE” with the SEC. of Trustees, without any specific description, where One Trustee ends and other Trustee Begins. It is classic obfuscation and musical chairs Note that Deutsche Bank is identified “as trustee” but the usual language of “under the terms of that certain trust dated….etc” are absent. This is because there usually is NO TRUST AGREEMENT designated as such and NO TRUST. In fact, as stated here it is merely an agreement between the co-issuers and Deutsche Bank, which it means that far from being a trust it is more like the operating agreement of an LLC) DEUTSCHE BANK cannot be a Trustee or investor or own the note, less, it becomes a partnership with the certificate holders(Who bought the certificates and invested money).
a). Investor and Trustee as per MERS member Org. ID # 1001425. Deutsche Bank cannot be a trustee and investor. If it has both then it has a partnership with the Certificate holders. b).. Interim Funder and Trustee as per MERS member Org, ID # 1002959 c). Document Custodian, Trustee and Collateral Agent as per MERS member Org. ID # 1000649 d). Investor and Trustee as per MERS member ORG. ID # 1001426 e). Servicer, Subservicers, Investor, Document Custodian, Trustee, Collateral Agent as per MERS member Org. ID # 1000648 The address of Deutsche Bank from “ a-e” above is the same 1761 East St. Andrew Pl. Santa Ana CA 92705-4934
SOME “48” TRUSTS IN WHICH PLAINTIFFS LOAN OF
“$491,250.00” WAS SOLD
FIVE TIMES IN EACH TRUST FOR
$ 91,662,688.32
SEC FILE #
Sold before closing
This Trust they admitted
This was a Shell Trust