ASSEVERATION AND DECLARATION
IN SUPPORT OF MORTAGE FRAUD
_________________ STATE ) ) Scilicet County of ______________ ) “Indeed, no more than (affidavits) is necessary to make the prima facie case.” United States v. Kis, 658 F.2nd, 526, 536 (7th Cir. 1981); Cert Denied, 50 U.S. L.W. 2169; S. Ct. March 22, 1982 That I, ________________________, a living breathing man (or woman (select one!), being first duly sworn, depose and say and declare by my signature that the following facts are true, correct and certain to the best of my knowledge and belief. 1. THAT, Affiant is not an attorney or a investment broker or dealer in realestate, bonds, securities as occupation, trade or profession. 2. THAT, Affiant has become exposed to the following facts which apply to Affiants Promissory Note/Mortgage/Foreclosure case/matter. 3. THAT, Affiant’s home and property is being foreclosed upon by _______________________, a corporation doing business within _____________________ State. 4. THAT, said Bank or Mortgage Company have a brokerage house that they use to set up trust accounts/trust funds within their so-called ‘Mortgage Home Loan’ business to the general public. 5. THAT, these trust funds are called tax transparencies within _________________________ ‘Mortgage Home Loan’ business. 6. THAT, __________________________ does not pay taxes on the in-sourcing or out-sourcing side of the trust fund that is why _____________________________ set these accounts up with the Depository Trust Company (DTC). 7. THAT, _________________________set up a trust fund which is a ‘REMIC’, a Real Estate Mortgage Investment conduit and they have an indentured trustee to disperse the funds, who does all the funds transfer, then ___________________________ sells off the trust funds as interest and dividends to direct in-equity participants through the DTC. 8. THAT, all mortgage payments go to the holders of the securities and the bonds and none of payments goes to the principle interest on the loan, not one little penny of it. 9. THAT, ____________________________________ are selling or has sold Affiants ‘Note’(s), it extinguished the debt, its called de-recognition. The mortgage is extinguished from the books; all the payments Affiant made towards the mortgage goes to the holders of the trust certificates or the
1 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
_____________________________ did not inform Affiant that a ‘Notice of Security’ once deposited in an account becomes the equivalent of money. 12. _____________________________ failed to present a prima facie case and only created a presumption that the Affiant owes money. supplied by the Affiant via the promissory note… as the assets for all these conduits. ____________________________ failed to disclose that the Affiant lent the bank so-called money. etc. ___________________________ sells the note(s). a Home Equity Line of Credit. they actually securitize them. THAT.. and the Bank has to pay Affiant back. THAT. Affiant is the creditor on accounts payable and the debtor because on the accounts receivable because the bank is the creditor on the accounts receivable and the debtor on the accounts payable. 18. which is called an asset. where ______________________________ got the security and the collateral for these tax transparencies and the assets. THAT. 11. THAT. which is Affiants counter claim. discharge the existing loan and they charge your account on the accounts receivable)…__________________________ works entirely on the accounts receivable side of the accounting ledger. Affiant has funds in the bank to set off the entire accounts receivable which is what the promissory note(s) are based on. 312 311. THAT. THAT. 17. That is where the loan comes from. THAT. (most people have an existing loan and a second or third and what they do is. 13. THAT. which are the Affiants equity or Affiants direct participants through the DTC. THAT. it does not come from the bank by and through all the papers the Affiant signed at the bank. says states that One has to have possession and control of the Note in order to have a security interest. whereby the Plaintiff has filed into the court record the evidence of the agreement and ‘instrument’ tendered to discharge the debt and the facts in this Affidavit herein rebuts the presumption otherwise. 16. HELOC is called an equity line of credit. wherein _______________________________ gave Affiant an equity line of credit and they used Affiants ‘Note’ for security and collateral for the loan. 14.
2 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
. 19. 10. Affiant has an opposite side of accounts payable which is an offset to the accounts receivable. Affiant is the originator under 4A-104C of the first funds transferred… via the promissory note tendered. _______________________________ is only giving Affiant an equity line of credit. ____________________________________ monetize these notes. ________________________________ turns them into negotiable instruments through a REMIC. so ______________________________ does not have standing to bring a claim anyway because ___________________________ have no possession or control of the note(s) under Article 9-313. it comes from the HELOC trust. _________________________________ used Affiants collateral to securitize the REMIC which is called a tax transparency. they don’t possess the note(s). 15. a line of credit. securitize means they take the trust deed and the promissory note and make them negotiable. THAT.securities and the bonds. they take a bunch of notes and they pull them together and they create a ‘HELOC’.
a note is both a financial asset and a liability. not disclosed by ________________________. but it is just a book ledger or computer entry. 23. what ________________________ does within heir accounting legers. 24. THAT. Affiant is identified on ___________________________ books because Affiant gave them a security that they monetized when they deposited the note. THAT. on the accounts receivable its treated as a liability but on the accounts payable its treat as an assets. commercial paper. _______________________________ wrote up a note for value received. it
3 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
. if someone tendered the promissory note. it is all the same. Section X). the credit. it becomes the equivalent of so-called money. Which primarily comes from bills of exchange. So. can use that dollar amount as an offset to offset the accounts receivable and get rid of the liability. 25. In fact. 27. Because there is no money or no real lawful constitutional money of exchange (Article I. it becomes ‘so-called’ money but lacks the redeem-ability. 22. then the Affiant as the creditor on the accounts payable. without full disclosure. but whatever they loaned Affiant has to pay back in like kind. they create money on the books. 21. [court cases say promissory notes are a intangibles but when they deposit that. THAT. 26. actually gave ________________________ value. THAT. Affiant gave them so-called money and now ______________________________ has to give that back to Affiant. is that the Affiant is the security and title holder and the Affiant therein has rights as against the fraud of _____________________________.20. Constitutional Money of Exchange is what Walker Todd defines it. pursuant to the Uniform Commercial code. 29. whatever is loaned must be paid back in like kind. THAT. pursuant to international accounting standards board. then if there is the demand for payment then the payment has to be in like kind that was loaned which was again either a promissory note or other commercial paper. ________________________________ did not disclose to the Affiant what they are doing. the ‘money’. whether it is a loan or whatever and _________________________ they are treating it as a general intangible. it is the basis of gold and silver coin. the Affiant in having a ‘mortgage’. the Affiant in signing and tendering a ‘Promissory Note’ to ___________________________. The federal rule is. Todd). they do electronic and book entries. (see attached ‘Affidavit of Walker F. So if they are taking the position that they loaned Affiant money. which. 28. THAT. but we use the word money. So there is no money of exchange? What we have today is money of account. or promissory notes. which is no longer in existence. THAT. THAT. THAT. when they deposit a note/promissory note in an account. It has absolutely nothing to do with a mortgage loan. agreed to pay them back the money and _______________________________ initiated foreclosure on Affiant when Affiant got behind in payments. THAT. THAT. and Affiant. _______________________________ needs collateral and security for these HELOCS and what ________________________ are doing is using Affiants security and collateral to underwrite the commodities of the security exchange. 30. When anyone deposits ‘federal reserve notes’.
39. _________________________ sells everything. These people are getting away with murder because they are selling stuff that they have no right. If by order of the Court.becomes a financial assets which is a security. and that’s why ____________________________ refuses to produce the ‘Promissory Note’. 33. Affiant has a right of recoupment. the notes are sold to them.(NOTE. what ________________________ are doing. THAT. THAT. THAT. If ___________________________ took the note. fraud in the factum and fraud by scienter. because they guarantee the principle on the interest to the holders and securities of the bonds. The paying agent guarantees the payment. THAT. they actually sell the pulling and servicing agreement. ‘without recourse’ and bear either the signature of the president or the vice president of the bank via the endorsement on the back of said note. they sell the entire account to them. 32. As an example. and they just reimburse Fanny May for it. 31. subsection 7 and 15.) 34. title. there is no holder due course on the ‘Promissory Note’ as any holder in due course takes in with out notice of any defects or claims of the issuer against the payee? If a person takes it with notice of a claim. BankOne Security Corp.. it states if a person. contract or
4 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
. with notice of a recoupment or a set off. (NOTE. Affiant herein has noticed ____________________________ of right of recoupment or counterclaim via the Notice of Tort Claim sent via Certified Mail number ______________________________ and received by ________________________ on ____(Date)_______. 35. is taking the monthly payments and giving them to the holders of the securities. Fanny May controls all these loans.) 37. (See UCC 3-106(D). Only a person who is a holder in Due Course has a right or standing to foreclose on a note. ____________________________ took the Promissory Note with fraud. a counterclaim or a defense. THAT. THAT. ____________________________ is not a holder in Due Course and has no right or standing to foreclose on [a] the note or the property of the Affiant. [pursuant to UCC 3-104 (e) its no longer a liability instrument. so indirectly. 36. which is a holding company incorporated in Delaware. its an asset instrument which is an order to pay. which means ___________________________have been paid. he can be a holder but not a holder in Due Course. then he cannot be a holder in Due Course. they even sell the rights to payment. or interest in. which Fanny May guarantees the payments and what they do is they get a paying agent from one of the Federal Reserve banks that pays the principle interest on it. The ESTRY Registration statement tells you what they are doing with the funds and notes. 2007. so everything is done through Delaware. See UCC 3-305. a security is financial asset and a financial asset is a security. 38. UCC 3-102. THAT. and a promissory note is a security. most all banks or holding companies are Delaware Corporations. and if _______________________ endorses it on the back of the ‘Promissory Note’ [which they do]. THAT. it becomes an order to pay. Everything is in the accounting but One has to understand what they are doing with the accounting. THAT. _______________________________ would produce the ‘instrument’ (promissory Note) it would show that it has been endorsed on the back and it would state on it to ‘pay to the order of’. then they are not a holder in Due Course.
they are just coming after you because they have pulling and servicing rights. 2. 41. which says the issuer is the drawer or the banker which does the first funds transfer. they took the value for it. then you go to UCC 3-105. when they deposit it into an account that brings it under article 8.’ It’s in the accounting and it’s complex. the note is an asset on one instance and it’s a liability on the accounts payable and an asset on the receivables… they are coming after you under the accounts receivable. (See what an entitlement holder is under 8-102 subsection 17 and 8-102 subsection 7. 44. All of this ‘Promissory Note’ transaction is under securities and not under what is perceived as normal banking transactions/deposits. at the time Affiant(s) ‘autographed’ the Note. That is why these servicing companies come after the people/affiant via debt collector attorneys and not the original owner and they do not even have the note. and tender the note to the bank that was the first funds transfer. _______________________ is in dishonor and fails to prove the challenge and the authenticity of the signature and ______________________ has failed or refused and therefore cannot bring the note forward as they do not have a case for foreclosure.
5 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
. THAT. and they even sold the pulling and servicing rights. THAT. They sold the trustee. and it is an asset to them so doesn’t that offset the liability automatically? 46. 1AF39. When you endorse the note the drawer and the banker. because you are the originator under 4A-104. (NOTE. they ledgered it into the accounting. under 3-105 A and C. 47. When they sell the note they extinguish it from their books. you also have a claim to possession of property interest in the note. they sold the note.10. THAT. if they have notice under applicable statutory or administrative law that they are taking the note with notice of a defense or claim against the issuer then they can not be a holder in Due Course. It is called ‘The Great Horror of Babylon. ______________________________ created the value for it. Affiant did not sign the ‘Promissory Note’ via the supplemental form and substance that attaches to the signature at the time of signing. 43. ______________________________ made a material alteration on the Note by endorsing the Note and then selling it. See accounting rules. ___________________________ is required to produce the ‘Promissory Note’ and if ____________________ fails to bring forth the ‘Promissory Note’. and 3. which controls Article 3. THAT. THAT. There are two sides to the account. they sold everything. which is one defined as an entitlement holder and the other defines the security entitlement. Affiant(s) were not fully disclosed of what is going on within the transaction and therefore it is an invalid ‘signature’ that appears on the ‘Promissory Note’ and any other documents signed at that time. 42.) 40. Security is the entitlement holder who is identified on the books of a banking intermediary? As the entitlement holder. 45. THAT. who has security and entitlement rights under 8-501. THAT.obligation. _____________________________ what they did was set up a securities account. A. THAT. That is why many of these companies are secondary companies that have pulling and servicing rights that were sold to them by the original mortgage company. They sold the pulling and servicing agreement.
Read the following. fully admits. THAT. ___________________________________ Seal.48. the Affiant(s) did not sign the Note and ____________________________ therefore ____________________________ is required to produce the Note. (NOTE. (Maxim of Law. this ‘Promissory Note’ transaction is not showing up in the accounting legers because it has been brought under a securities account that is why no body knows where the accounting legers are. personally appeared and known to me to be the man whose name subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to be the same. stipulates and confesses to the fraud as imposed upon and against the Affiant in relation to any monetary injuries of the Affiant.D. fraud vitiates all things from the beginning. THAT. Done this ______day of ______________________. it is of necessity that _______________________________ rebuts this Affidavit point by point within 30 days upon receipt otherwise all facts contained herein become facts upon the record in this matter. under full disclosure and to verify that the Note was duly ‘signed’ under said full disclosure and that no fraud was perpetuated upon the Affiant in this matter/transaction. along with all accounting of the Note. A. ________________________________ is in full agreement and is estopped as to any defense and that _______________________________. 2011.Affiant
SUBCRIBED TO AND SWORN before me this _____day of _________________. 49. that ___________________. Further Affiant Sayth Not. a Notary. because of the fraud committed by ___________________________ in their failure to make full disclosure by producing the right documents. THAT. Notary Public in and for said State
My Commission expires. 2011 A.D. but delete from your finished affidavit!
6 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud
Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
___________________________________________ Your name .) THAT. This is why One does not understand what is going on and why people cannot possibly win in court.
but if they cannot bring the note forward and prove the signature then they do not have a case.Since your claim is that you loaned us money. They do not have the note. yes. doesn’t that challenge the authenticity of the signature if you deny the signature? If ‘they’ gave you full disclosure of all facts. When you bind a judge under contract by oath and bond.” Well true. if you give us our note back we will give you your money back. how are they going to prove you signed it? Wouldn’t they have to bring it forward? Sure. but when you signed the Note or somebody signs the Note. otherwise they are making political decision… If they take the note. we put this judge under contract. that’s how you control these courts. contract or obligation. “If we signed the Note. Well there is the aspect of supplemental form as attaches to the signature at the time of signing. then no body owes anybody anything.” Can they prove it? One of the things they have to prove is that you signed the note. Go read 3-106D. we had the judge order them to produce the note. with notice of a recoupment or a set off. if they were not fully disclosed of what is going on within the transaction then it is an invalid signature!
7 – Asseveration in Support of Mortgage Fraud
Item # 05122011-1/MortCo/ABC
. ok. produce it. The mistake most people make is they admit they signed the note. if they have notice under applicable statutory or administrative law that they are taking the note with notice of a defense or claim against the issuer then they can’t be a holder in Due Course. you could then state that that is your signature (comporting to form!) Now unless you admit you signed the note. “I did not sign the note. its says if a person. he has to rule according to the law. The point is. One might state. Ok. as we told them. you have to control the court. then they are not a holder in Due Course. We are a third party intervener to his bond in the oval office.