1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

XFINITY Connect

tbryant80@comcast.net

+ Font Size -

Notice to Investors of GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15
From : tbryant80@comcast.net Subject : Notice to Investors of GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15 To : ian r graham <ian.r.graham@hsbcpb.com> As to Trustee - As to Investors and all responsible parties to Claris Limited Series 66/2006 Tranche 1 Be aware that you are on notice as to the adverse claim to your right, title, or interest in the note or mortgage involved at any time between original issue and the present. You have been involved in an elaborate securities fraud scheme, either voluntarily or involuntarily, orchestrated by the responsible parties to GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15. These parties have not only embezzled from myself, they have been embezzling from investors. The responsible parties have also created the destruction of the trust existing under NY and Federal law. As the trustee is now attempting a foreclosure action, to which I have already made numerous legal demands upon the responsible parties, showing that default has never occurred, and their default began but for embezzlement by C ountrywide Home Loans, Inc. This is an attempted extortion by the trust, and if successful, investors will be in criminal receipt of stolen property. HSBC Trustee (C.I.) Limited is a trustee in; Tranche 2A2 - the securities of which were sold into Claris 66/2006 Tranche 1, in direct violation of the indentures of the original trust existing and governed by NY law and the laws of the United States, and the terms and conditions of the underlying note and mortgage, governed by the laws of the state of Massachusetts, and US Federal law. The Securities Exchange Act is not applicable law under the terms and conditions of the note and mortgage, and no parts of either can be transferred or sold overseas. Please note; 1) The Trustee of GSAA HET 2005-15, is HSBC Bank USA, NA, an affiliate of your corporation. 2) The Securities Administrator and Master Servicer for GSAA HET 2005-15, is Wells Fargo Bank, NA, who is also the Portfolio Administrator for the Claris 66/2006 trust. Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 tbryant80@comcast.net https://twitter.com/trident90 http://www.scribd.com/magick2469 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "helen mucciolo" <helen.mucciolo@ny.frb.org> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 4:29:02 PM Subject: Notice to Investors of GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15 Be aware that you are on notice as to the adverse claim to your right, title, or interest in the note or mortgage involved at any time between original issue and the present. You have been involved in an elaborate securities fraud scheme, either voluntarily or involuntarily, orchestrated by the responsible parties to GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15. These parties have not only embezzled from myself, they have been embezzling from investors. The responsible parties have also created the destruction of the trust existing under NY and Federal law. As the trustee is now attempting a foreclosure action, to which I have already made numerous legal demands upon the responsible parties, showing that default has never occurred, and their default began but for embezzlement by C ountrywide Home Loans, Inc. This is an attempted extortion by the trust, and if successful, investors will be criminal receipt of stolen property. The FRBNY and Maiden Lane III was an investor; 1- in tranche 2A3 under the Maiden Lane III transaction with AIG and Treasury. 2- in tranche M6 under the Maiden Lane III transaction with AIG and Treasury (Hout Bay 2006-1) This list may not be all inclusive.
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 1/7

Sun, Jan 13, 2013 10:31 PM

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 tbryant80@comcast.net https://twitter.com/trident90 http://www.scribd.com/magick2469 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net>, ClaireCatalano@quinnemanuel.com, "joyce jones" <joyce.jones@wellsfargo.com>, investor@hsbc.com Cc: HSUK@SEC.GOV, FFETF@usdoj.gov, econsumerwb@ftc.gov, "Office AttyGeneral-MA" <ago@state.ma.us>, "PressOffice AttyGeneral-NY" <NYAG.Pressoffice@oag.state.ny.us>, "DC-MD House of Representatives, Elijah Cummings" <ecummings0@cs.com>, "comments DivOfBanks" <dob.comments@state.ma.us>, "OCC Alert Responses" <OCCAlertResponses@occ.treas.gov> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 3:14:07 PM Subject: Re: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 SLS has thrown down the gauntlet, trying to foreclose on my house, which they have no right, title, or interest in. I will now get ALL of the investors of the NY trust drawn into this, since the trust is attempting to illegally collect a debt that they are not owed, and have never had any right, title, or interest in my house. Each investor will be deemed equally complicit in the activities listed below, and in receipt of stolen property. Why do you think C ountrywide and MERS took my mortgage loan out of their names a long time ago? because they were confronted with the truth, once they got caught. Have they forwarded all the legal demands I had sumbitted uponb them over the last 4 years, to the trust? I doubt it, because it proves that they have embezzled funds from not only myself, but the securities holders. Hell, your accounting for the loan is totally different than the trust's accounting for the loan. There is a five month difference in payments received. How exactly does that occur? Have the certificateholders been notified of the accounting differences between the servicer and the trust? You and your predecessors, have refused to acknowledge and address the criminal activities of the trust and it's responsible parties, which includes attempted extortion, forgery, embezzlement, larceny, perjury, securities fraud, mortgage lending fraud, and violations of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, and Money Laundering, amongst others. I am now taking off the gloves, and am now addressing all certificateholders, both domestic and international, directly, who would be the ultimate creditors. The responsible parties have tortionally interfered in the alleged debtor-creditor relationship, as thirdparty interlopers. You same interlopers, who have used my signature and credit to secure profits on your own side deals including monoline insurance, yield spread premiums, hedging agreements, interest-rate swap agreements, investments, and rehypothecation ad infinitum of financial assets which you have never owned. In fact, Countrywide itself never had any right, title, or interest in the loan, as it never loaned me a single penny. Bank of New York, a clearing bank, lent the money through triparty repo and warehouse lending agreements with the securities intermediaries. These same intermediaries not only were not licensed mortgage lenders, they also had no authority to transact business in Massachusetts, and GS Mortgage Securities Corp, had their Foreign Corporation certificate revoked in 1998. These were entirely illegal banking and securities transactions, hidden by using the corporate names of Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. This includes securities fraud and false claims involving the United States Government, as to FHFA (tranche 1A1), and Treasury under the Maiden Lane transactions (tranche 2A3). I have already been conversing with Claire Catalano, of Quinn Emannuel, the law firm representing FHFA v Goldman Sachs involving the trust. Not to mention the securities fraud involving the fact that all the Countrywide notes and mortgages have always been, and continue to sit, in Building 400, Simi Valley, CA. Countrywide never sold the loans into the trust. They pledged them, and retained all the notes and mortgages. Since that is all the trust consists of, GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15 is a non-existent trust, and the securities which Goldman Sachs sold, were worthless. The FedEx records of CHL & BOA would evidence this, as well as numerous depositions by officers of Countrywide Home Loans. Then we will address all the tranches that were sold off overseas by the responsible parties, undermining the indentures of the original trust. This was accomplished by decertifying with the SEC one-week after the trusts formation. The trust ceased to exist and be governed by NY law, and sold tranches were expressly prohibited from having any interests US-ownership interests, and away from US regulation and law. Did the trust ever disclose these facts to investors? We will soon see. How many investors are their currently in the trust? The trustee has no idea, but I can assure you it is more than 500, and well within regulation by the SEC. Cede & Co, as well as EuroClear, would prove such facts. I also know the trust's "existing" tranches have not suffered a single penny in losses, mostly because the losses have been absorbed by the tranches sold overseas, away from US law and regulation. I also can guarantee that the trusts activities have never been disclosed to the Internal Revenue Service, which would report repeated and continuing violations of the REMIC status of the trust. I for one, will be giving them detailed information as to the activities, both domestically, and internationally, of the trust. It also should not be lost that these actions are in direct violation of the SEC disgorgement of Countrywide in 2009, the MA AGO settlement with Countrywide in 2009, the national foreclosure settlement agreement (which was a "do-over" of the 2009 agreement, the cease and desist orders against all the parties with the OCC, FRB, FTC, etc. Let's also not forget that HSBC, the
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 2/7

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

trsutee for this trust, has also settled criminal charges for it's previous money-laundering activities. And if you still think I am bluffing.... http://www.scribd.com/collections/4016852/GSAA-Home-Equity-Trust-2005-15 This is just the tip of the iceberg... Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 tbryant80@comcast.net https://twitter.com/trident90 http://www.scribd.com/magick2469 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net> Cc: "Tim MA-Bryant" <tbryant80@comcast.net> Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 1:18:18 PM Subject: Re: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 As to Agent - As to Principle and/or Investors Also note, that a mortgage is covenanted between a borrower and lender. In the Master Servicer of GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15's own words, there is no lender. Therefore, there is no continuing contract, and is therefore not actionable. Every contact, statement, and demand you address to me is a violation of Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 93A. Also, every contact, statement, and demand that has ever been sent to me by any responsible party of the trust is also a violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 tbryant80@comcast.net https://twitter.com/trident90 http://www.scribd.com/magick2469 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net> Cc: "Tim MA-Bryant" <tbryant80@comcast.net> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2012 1:57:59 PM Subject: Re: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 As to Agent - As to Principal(s); Failing to disclose the identity of the creditor for whom a debt collector is agent, is a $1,000 violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, which is a per se violation of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 93A. Consider this communication a written demand for relief in the amount of $1,000 for such violation. Specialized Loan Servicing has 30-days to grant such relief under MGL Chapter 93A, Section 9(3). Failure to respond may result in further violation of MGL Chapter 93A. Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net> Cc: "Tim MA-Bryant" <tbryant80@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2012 2:30:40 PM Subject: Re: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 Upon speaking to an SLS representative yesterday, I w as told that SLS did not have to disclose to me w ho they w ere collecting a debt on behalf of, or w hom they claim to be servicer for. As I had proved in the attached email, SLS does have to disclose the creditor to w hom the debt is allegedly ow ed. SLS is debt collecting and loan servicing in violation of their MA licenses, and MA General Laws Chapter 93A. As agent as principle,
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 3/7

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

whomever hired Specialized Loan Servicing is also equally violating MGL Chapter 93A. Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net> Cc: "Tim MA-Bryant" <tbryant80@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, November 20, 2012 12:27:38 PM Subject: Re: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 AS TO AGENT ALSO TO PRINCIPLE I have received your "Welcome Letter", w hich states I have an account# 1006509386. There is no breakdow n for the alleged debt, or even an existing balance. Please see the attached certificateholder distribution summary for GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15 for October 2012. There is not a single penny in losses that any of the existing tranches have suffered. Apparently, from the trusts own records, they have all been covered presumably by sureties, guarantees, and insurance products that have been applied to the certificateholders accounting, yet have not been applied to the underlying loan accounts. As previously stated, those monies are to be applied to the underlying debt obligations, per the terms and conditions of the mortgage loan documents. As I declared, there is no debt. You are attempting to collect a nonexistent debt, that only has life through fraudulent accounting practices, and embezzlement of funds applied by secondary obligors to the loan. This would be a violation of your MA debt collectors license, as it is a false and misleading statement concerning the character, amount, or legal status of the debt. LET ME MAKE IT CLEAR THAT I DISPUTE THE VALIDITY OF ANY ALLEGED DEBT WHICH YOU ARE ATTEMPTING TO COLLECT. NO OTHER FORM, STATEMENT, FILING, OR COMMUNICATION IS REQUIRED TO CONTINUE SUCH DISPUTE. THIS ALSO CONSTITUTES A NOTICE OF DISHONOR TO THE DEMAND FOR PAYMENT UNDER THE NOTE AND MORTGAGE, WHICH INSTRUMENTS HAVE BEEN FULLY REALISED, AND ALL PARTIES (EXCEPT THE BORROWER) HAVE REACHED ACCORD AND SATISFACTION. THIS IS ALSO A DEMAND FOR THE RETURN OF THE PROMISSORY NOTE TO THE BORROWER, MARKED "PAID". THIS IS ALSO DEMAND FOR THE DISCHARGE OF THE MORTGAGE AS PER MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL LAW CHAPTER 183, SECTION 55. THIS INCLUDES ALL INTERVENING ASSIGNMENTS TO BE RECORDED WITH THE DISCHARGE, FROM THE ORIGINATOR, UP TO AND INCLUDING, THE CURRENT HOLDER, AS PER THE STATUTE. THIS ALSO INCLUDES THE DOCUMENT(S) THAT ALLEGEDLY GAVE MORTGAGE ELECTRONIC REGISTRATION SYSTEMS, INC., THE EXPRESS WRITTEN AUTHORITY TO ACT AS AGENT FOR EACH PARTY. I am also giving you the opportunity to address this situation with the alleged creditor. I am demanding a validation of the debt, based on both sides of the ledger, accounts receivable and accounts payable (assets/liabilities), and from all sources of payment, per 209 CMR 18.18 (Code of Massachusetts Regulations). 18.18: Validation of Debts 1. Within five days after the initial communication w ith a consumer in connection w ith the collection of any debt, a debt collector shall, unless the follow ing information is contained in the initial communication or the consumer has paid the debt, send the consumer a w ritten notice containing: a. the amount of the debt; b. the name of the creditor to w hom the debt is ow ed; c. a statement that unless the consumer, w ithin thirty days after receipt of the notice, disputes that validity of the debt, or any portion thereof, the debt w ill be assumed to be valid by the debt collector; d. a statement that if the consumer notifies the debt collector in w riting w ithin the thirty-day period that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, the debt collector w ill obtain verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment against the consumer and a copy of such verification or judgment w ill be mailed to the consumer by the debt collector; and
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 4/7

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

e. a statement that, upon the consumer's w ritten request w ithin the thirty-day period, the debt collector w ill provide the consumer w ith the name and address of the original creditor, if different from the current creditor. 2. If the consumer notifies the debt collector in w riting w ithin the thirty-day period described in 209 CMR 18.18(1) that the debt, or any portion thereof, is disputed, or that the consumer requests the name and address of the original creditor, the debt collector shall cease collection of the debt, or any disputed portion thereof, until the debt collector obtains verification of the debt or a copy of a judgment, or the name and address of the original creditor, and a copy of such verification or judgment, or name and address of the original creditor, is mailed to the consumer by the debt collector. 3. A debt collector shall provide to a consumer or any attorney for a consumer w ithin five business days the follow ing: (a) All papers or copies of papers, in the possession of the debt collector w hich bear the signature of the consumer and w hich concern the debt being collected; (b) A ledger, account card, or similar record in the possession of a debt collector, w hich reflects the date and amount of payments, credits, and charges concerning the debt. 4. The failure of a consumer to dispute the validity of a debt under 209 CMR 18.18 may not be construed by any court as an admission of liability by the consumer.

Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368 From: tbryant80@comcast.net To: "dolores gilden" <dolores.gilden@sls.net> Cc: "Tim MA-Bryant" <tbryant80@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2012 9:52:32 PM Subject: Response to voicemail message of 11 15 2012 In regards to your representation as a loan servicer, presumably for GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15, that trust has never held my note or mortgage, and could not legally EVER hold such, and Countrywide Home Loans, Inc explicitly waived the default provisions of the note and mortgage in writing. Neither the deregistered trust, any of the "responsible parties" indentured to it, (which I am not aware that SLS even has any authority as a servicer under), or any other person or entity has any standing in any Massachusetts Court for any claim against me on a non-existent mortgage. I have relayed this to Claire Catalano of Quinn Emanuel, the attorney of one of the investors, FHFA. The other investors, including AIG, the NY Fed, US Treasury (all under Maiden Lane II), JP Morgan 401K fund, the City of Cincinnati Retirement Fund, Federated Core Trust II, CitiMortgage Loan Trust (which HSBC is not a Trustee), Claris II series 66/2006 Tranche 1 (to which HSBC and Wells Fargo have conflicts of interest as the interests in the notes are forbidden from being held by any US entity or person, or subject to US law), and others are also being notified. The investors will be held liable, as the creditors of the trust for any acts taken, or attempted to be taken against me. The trust claims in their PSA that the mortgage loans were purchased from GS Mortgage Securities Corporation as Depositor. GS Mortgage Securities Corp had their MA Foreign Corporation certificate revoked in 1998, and could not conduct ANY business in MA, or under it's laws. It should not be lost that both the note and mortgage were under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and all agreements regarding the securitization of the note occurred before the actual closing of the underlying transactions. This was a premeditated attempt at avoiding the actions against GS Mortgage Securities Corp, by the Secretery of State of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Therefore they could not deal in any fashion with either the note or mortgage, and no entity could conduct business on their behalf as well. No successor has any right of action in a MA court either, until they provide a certificate for GSMSC, which was revoked. As such, MERS, Countrywide Home Loans Servicing, the mortgage, and the note, were functus officio. MERS was repeatedly demanded to release the mortgage, which they failed to respond to, in violation of MA General Law and UCC Article 9. They also, outside of the contract, converted the tangible document to an electronic document of title, covered under UCC Article 7. MERS, Countrywide Home Loans, and probably other entities, breached the mortgage immediately, by unilaterally converting the tangible document of title, to an electronic record controlled by MERSCORP Holdings, Inc, a non-party to the contract. MERSCORP Holdings, Inc, not Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc., became the controlling party of the electronic record, as per UCC Art 7-106. MERS was no longer the mortgagee, as MERSCORP became the bailee, with interests transferred via the electronic record. Under UCC Art 7-105(d)(1), the tangible mortgage became void. Once the mortgage was
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 5/7

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

deactivated in MERSCORP's MERS(TM) System, the electronic record also ceased to exist. Once again, this was a voluntary act by the "creditor parties". MERS, as a debtor owing the return of the legal title to my property back to me, not only failed to respond to said demands, but then fraudulently conveyed the mortgage and note (which they are not licensed as a bank to deal in notes) to BAC Home Loans Servicing, who neither buys notes, nor is a MERS member. Ironically, MERS also assigned the obligations under the note to BACHLS, as well (a novation). This was performed by employees of BACHLS under the "alter ego" of MERS. Every party who has "held" the mortgage is liable to me as creditor, for the return of the collateral, and surrender of the mortgage. Ironically, BACHLS also filed a certificate of withdrawal from doing business, with the MA Secretary of State in July 2011, while the mortgage was publicly recorded in their name. Bank of America, NA assigned the note and mortgage, without recourse, to the trust in April 2012, almost 7 years after the trust's closing date, a violation of it's IRS REMIC status and the trust's own indentures, governed by the Trust Indenture Act and NY Trust law. GS Mortgage Securities Corp "purchased" the mortgage loans through Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, who also was never registered to do business in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc, the "lender" of the note, who never actually lent any money, entered into a Master Mortgage Loan Purchase Agreement with GSMC on July 1, 2004, governing this transaction. Regarding the individual mortgage loans, Countrywide Home Loans warranted to GSMC that the loans can never be in default. CHL and GSMC, voluntarily and explicitly in writing, waived the default provisions of the note and mortgage. As such, I have never been, and can never be, in default. The trust is estopped from ever asserting such. The trust "bought" worthless bank notes, as the principle balances of the notes had been extracted, and sold to the Underwriter, Goldman Sachs & Co. These were converted to certificated securities, hybrid derivative instruments, and equity instruments, and sold to investors, who became the unsecured creditors. There was nothing of value to sell to the trust after this conversion, and the documents that were allegedly transferred to the trust (but never were by Countrywide's own acknowledgement), were worthless, and transferred no right, title, or interest in any of the underlying mortgage loans. The Trustee is not a holder in due course, a "note holder" as defined in the borrower's note, a creditor, or a secured party. Even under UCC Article 8, they cannot claim possession. The Depositor attempted to sell the same notes and mortgages twice, which is a felony of uttering a counterfeit note. The trust then did the same thing by selling tranches to other trusts through CDOs and resecuritizations. One of them, Claris II series 66/2006 expressly forbids any interests to be held by any US person or entity, under the authority of US law, or registered with the SEC. Since the interest in the notes are based on the assets of the trust, which only consists of the notes and mortgages inalienable from the law of the jurisdiction which they reside, the trustee has no authority on behalf of the certificate holders of that tranche to do anything under US or state law. That again, was a voluntary act by the trust's "responsible parties". The trust itself was deregistered one week after it was formed. The SEC filing acknowledges that the Trustee does not represent all the certificate holders, as DTCC, via nominee Cede & Co, are the representatives of the undisclosed certificate holders with their book-entry certificates registered with the Depository Trust Company. Neither does the Trustee represent any holders in Tranche 2A2, which itself is divided up amongst various trusts. Many of the certificate holders in that tranche are represented by DTC's european counterparts, Clear Stream of Luxembourg, and Euroclear SA/NV. The trust, through it's "alleged" agents, have been served "agent to principle" with numerous legal demands by myself, and legal representatives since 2007. Not once, has any agent responded affirmatively to any such demands. The principle at all times remained unnamed, and in a few instances, a false principle was named. These are all "alleged" agents of the "alleged" principle, GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-15. At all times, the principle's liabilities under the terms of the note and mortgage were disclaimed. Until the summer of 2010, the servicers never acted as agents for the principle. They acted as the principle themselves, declaring themselves to me, and through the MERS records, as the holder of both the note and mortgage at all times. To this day, the "note holder" has never identified themselves, and provided the proper notices required under such, and have created a legal impossibility of performance under the note on my part. That has occurred by the voluntary acts of the trust through the "responsible parties", and third party interlopers, MERS and MERSCORP. The agents have also collected thousands of dollars from me, which have never been forwarded to the trust, according to the Master Servicer / Securities Administrator's own records. This includes overescrowing and illegal fees, among others. The agents have failed and refused to this day to give a proper accounting, another material breach of the contract. Neither the lender, nor any alleged "note holder" ever intended on being contractually bound to the borrower, as that is not what the true nature of the transaction ever was. It was at all times a securities transaction, where the rights and remedies of the borrower, and the lender's liabilities and fiduciary responsibilities to the borrower, were to be disregarded and circumvented through an undisclosed Pooling and Servicing Agreement, which materially changed the terms and conditions of the original contracts through the trust indentures. This is just the tip of the iceberg. I have not even addressed the lack of standing of the trust and trustee, outside of the issues stated above. I also have not even delved into the undisclosed transactions that fraudulently concealed the true value of the mortgage loan. The mortgage loan transaction did not disclose the entire value or consideration within the four corners of the document. There was never any mention of the gains received by the use of the credit and signature of the borrower by credit enhancements, weighted yield spread premiums, dollar yield spreads, interest rate swap agreements, credit default swaps, guarantees, sureties, insurance, mortgage servicing rights, underwriting fees, servicer advances, master servicer advances, master servicer fees, trustee fees, investments of principle and interest, derivative instruments, hedge products, multiple sales of the note (including counterfeits), fees to MERSCORP (a non-party) for recording changes in beneficial interests in their electronic registry in violation of the applicable law requirement of the note and mortgage, third party contractual loss mitigation payments, counterparty payments, etc. These gains exceed the nominal value of the actual loan, all at the expense of the failure of consideration of the entire transaction, towards the borrower. Add to that customary interest and treble damages under TILA, and the trust (and investors) would be in debt to me. All fees, which are paid directly out of the borrower's payments, and undisclosed, are due back to the borrower under TILA as well. Insurance proceeds, guarantees, and sureties, are to be directly credited against the obligation under the terms of the underlying note. That would only be ascertained by disclosure of the liability ledger and Accounts Payable ledger of the trust. Since the trust documents, and all the agreements leading to the securitization have been
web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1 6/7

1/13/13

XFINITY Connect

expressly "off balance sheet", the trust could never give a true accounting of any underlying debtor account even if they wanted to. That is because the debt has been paid due to all the undisclosed transactions described above. In addition to the voiding of the instruments by the voluntary acts of the parties, all of said acts are in direct violation of Regulation Z of the Federal Reserve and the applicable provisions of the Truth in Lending Act. Considering the refusal to answ er any direct interrogatories by the loan servicers and MERS, and their overt acts in regards to the note and mortgage, it is an issue of fact w hether the trust even received the mortgage loan in question, through securitization or otherw ise. Considering the vast number of assignments the same trust received years after the closing date, it is improbable, albeit a requirement for IRS REMIC status. That is an issue that w as the responsibility of Deutsche Bank National Trust as Document Custodian. If they failed to receive the collateral file by the closing date, the Trustee's only recourse is against the Document Custodian, as per the trust indentures. They do not have a remedy involving their agents and non-agents filing false and forged documents into the Registry of Deeds. You have tw o choices at this point, either acknow ledge the instruments are void, and return the original underlying instruments w ith evidence of such, or proceed w ith an illegal debt collection, w here I am actually the creditor, and the trusts and investors w ill be held jointly and severally liable. Tim A. Bryant 80 Bradford Drive Feeding Hills, MA 01030-2728 (413) 789-1368

web.mail.comcast.net/zimbra/h/printmessage?id=319985&tz=America/New_York&xim=1

7/7

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful