Saturday, April 04, 2009


Why Go After Livinglies and Garfield Web Viewers

Dear Attorney,

You submitted the license concerns, Bar and practice issues. THANK YOU for championing a novel concept for never practicing law or interfering with an attorney client relationship. However, I do have concerns that ask why go after Livinglies website which has absolutely nothing to do with the promotion of practicing unlawfulness and the State Bar.

This is not about trying to replace an attorney’s role. It’s about finding one and avoiding malpractice! It’s about the lack of knowledgeable for Mortgage Loan Hieroglyphics, Acceptance Zen and the Prospects of Underwriter Life Developing on Mars.

So what do you know and are you the pro bono elixir each homeowner is waiting for?

What is your email address for the readers suffering right now!

The few who understand this toxic-thermal mortgage mess are gone and were hired up by the lobbying effort and paid for from institutional earnings stolen from cash strapped investors and borrowers.

If you need medical treatment for an ailment - seek out a physician licensed by the appropriate medical board. What if for treating an immediate medical emergency or suffering brought by a cataclysmic destructive event such as an earthquake? A humanitarian view is to use any training (CPR) and resources around you (shirt of your back) to restore breathing, halt bleeding and save lives.

Woe to the attorney that dare step forward and require a license of the party who saves a life in an emergency. It’s your kind however that will bring arguments and demands upon fellow men after the human condition is restored and suffering and bleeding are long forgotten.

So will the Bar force attorney’s to get up to speed, stop taking money for nothing of value and to represent homeowners for a reasonable fee. Please Counsel, embrace this effort, jump in and Assist those who are suffering the humiliation and threat of loss from a foreclosure and that which does not what meet the eye.

That loss is family, friend’s school and unfortunately identity. The compassion is felt by many notable past and current Attorney Generals who I am sure like I want to know your motivation.

You need to help these people as a lawyer then and get going!

The lender will not offer assistance without a calling card and that is a pleading. No one advocates practicing law where only an attorney can - but they do ask the attorneys of the United States to take the next 20 years to get up to speed.

What do these people do? I am an expert who offers case management services and courtroom testimony to attorneys who can meet my stringent requirements for borrower eligibility.

1) victim to a predatory loan
2) Loosing their home
3) Have nowhere to go
4) Promise to detach*

* That means they promise not to kill themselves regardless of the end result.

At first glance and upon talking to lawyers on both sides, counsel will typically start with an insult and ask if I am an attorney. I say no sir, no apology necessary.
An expert is not an attorney and really more an accountant (auditor) by trade. But I know this much. A lawsuit is a civil action brought in a court of law by a plaintiff seeking relief from the court against the party named as the defendant. And in most instances, a lawsuit contains a request for monetary damages.

And lenders won’t talk seriously to you without your request being made in a pleading

According to a random reference book I found, Black’s something or other, “lawsuits can be brought for a large number of reasons such as breach of contract, seeking damages from an accident or other incident, seeking punitive damages if allowed by law, seeking an injunction to stop an action, for real estate disputes, dog biting people, neighbors walking across my yard to create a shorter path to one another and so on. Do you agree the list is endless?

SO WHAT!

Counsel, I would be foolish to see a dentist for neurosurgery. Yet I submit here that a divorce attorney is no more or less skilled at defending a wrongful foreclosure than is a Probate, Contract, Securities or Real Estate attorney. Each can argue a tort or breech yet none can seem to find it.

Your sector of society will step in and argue the window dressing and wrapper but where’s the beef?

I have been there to testify and heard the lawyer’s gibberish responses. You see I was the one who would not agreed to allow a securities offering to go forward while working on staff with lawyers as a consultant. And under protest I held back another toxic offering usually at the expense of missing my payment due for services rendered. Concerns were for why the issuance would fail under certain FASB and GAAP stress tests.

I have also thrown people out of there home and know the tricks such as waiting near a holiday, Thanksgiving, Christmas and Valentines Day to make my point clear. “Make your payment regardless of the Quality Control audited findings and exposure we see on your loan while trying to shield our firm’s massive vulnerability”.

We lenders, as a sector mingled over cocktail and supper in the plush dinning halls of the Mortgage Bankers Ballrooms found across the country. I would ask questions and wow! If you could hear the responses, from the leaders of . . . well, never mind.

From Sub prime misfits to the elite of the industry. Companies like Citigroup have established itself as a powerful player in subprime market acquiring competitors and employing its vast capital resources and its name-brand respectability. A report cites CitiFinancial, its flagship subprime unit, claims 4.3 million customers and 1,600 plus branches in forty-eight states, including nearly 350 offices across the South. Things don’t stop with CitiFinancial, however. The web of subprime is woven throughout Citigroup. Sandy Weill’s company has refashioned itself into a full-service subprime enterprise—one that makes high-cost loans and sells securities backed by the income streams from all these transactions. In 2000, one study calculated, nearly three of every four mortgages originated within Citigroup’s lending empire were made by one of its higher-interest subprime affiliates—nearly 180,000 loans out of a total of 240,000-plus mortgages for the year.

Why the attraction and what’s the best feature? High profitability or no downside in bad times?

In similar situations our sub prime goal was maximize profitability by stimulating hyperactivity in good times and foreclosure trading in black markets in bad times. Point is do you really know the dirt in the detail and can you offer anything to a client who borrowers $5,000 for a retainer and has nothing to show for it at time of a trustees or sheriff sale.

You’re the attorney! What class suits were you intimate or involved with? Want to talk about some of the questions surrounding Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 ("Securities Act") and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 there under. If found violating the registration provisions, Sections 5(a) and 5(c) of the Securities Act.

Help us, can you allow a plaintiff in a wrongful claim seek a judgment of permanent injunction, disgorgement and civil penalties against the Funding Entities, and disgorgement against certain Holdings, pending the matter?

How about yours and my own experience or expert witness roles in case's such as - FTC v. Associates First Capital Corporation, Associates Corporation of North America, Citigroup Inc., and CitiFinancial Credit Company (Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division). Civil Action No. 1:01-CV-00606-JTC; and Federal Trade Commission, Plaintiff, v. First Alliance Mortgage Company, a California corporation, First Alliance Corporation, a Delaware corporation, First Alliance Mortgage Company, a Minnesota corporation, and Brian Chisick, Defendants, and Sarah Chisick, Relief Defendant (Central District of California, Southern Division), Civil No. SACV 00-964 DOC.

Counsel you’re offering nothing more than a argument to own a license to fall back on and window dressing here with a lack of direction for legal guidence to address the dilemma.

Consider the following:

1) The role of a CDO investment under an SEC Blue Sky for $300 million
2) Why a financial publicly traded monster like B of A. will use a Reg. D private placement intended for a small guy who could not afford the cost to register a shelf
3) Why the hell is Citi or B of A is accessing and investing capital in the name of a silly venture
4) Why are institutional giants (ENRON in Reverse) subjecting liquidity which is an “Asset” to off balance sheet treatment? (What the F#$%)
5) Does the behavior of a “Veg -O- matic” sliced and diced onion (I mean security) in a CDO really merit the highest rating possible by a rating agency
6) Were the “X” Rated services of Moody’s and Duff wrongful and deceptive or simply pawns giving no concerns to the manufactured 680 borrower score?
7) Why is the MERS and Lost Note gibberish continuing to smoke screen the role of principal participant involvement prohibited by FIERREA legislation
8) Why are derivatives trading a smoking gun for misaligned acceptance practices to unqualified borrowers?
9) How is GAPP and a ABA manifest the sole tool to bring down the structure big time capital investors are hiding under
10) Why did AIG take the bonuses knowing the back lash was inevitable (ask yourself that one as I for one think they deserve every cent for buying into the lies)

I believe every civilized government provided its land barons the right of counsel before the king where land was seized from peasants in exchange for economic support (bribery) under a monarchy. Counsel came at a cost as it does today and was afforded only to the aristocratic minority who garnered the majority of the land and who could afford the protocol. That is to lawfully argue the right to steal land from another who could not afford to be represented. Our first President ensured the subjects of the crown were replaced with the citizens of a government. Washington proposed the ideal of a presiding leader voted in by the people for a set term. The right to revolt was replaced by the concept of the right to vote. And here’s a brilliant novel approach to deter anarchy and threat of coup. By allowing the citizens of a nation to share in the ownership of the land you remove the motivation to rally one and other against those who control the land and govern by tyranny and threat of force.

There is evidence the lobbying effort of the mortgage banking industry are becoming more organized, gaining clout in the courts and monetarily growing by the day. Politicians seeking to help constituents at this time are eventually going to need funding to remain in office. Cash strapped and broke homeowners are not the best capitalized population of voter revenue a politician will seek out for assistance. The fight is not so much about the fact people are losing their homes as much as it is the myriad of current and foreseen circumstances casing them to lose their homes.

Your remarks are just what the lobbying effort will use over time to crush the homeowner’s chances to survive. Home owner’s rights and survival refers the unbearable cost of seeking out a high priced lawyer’s retainer and menacing obstacle for lawyers who do not fully understand. By understand I mean as Garfield say’s “in the know” about Nuclear Thermal Devices (Carl Kop ESQ) and advanced Quantum Physics and Mortgage Acceptance and Beneficiary Rights to Recovery.

If the Office of the Comptroller is asking why organizations like “ACON and “DOPE” can’t seem to procure any modifications – well sir, what we have here is an inability to communicate.

Sub prime is not a discrimination issue either! So is this the best our lawyers can do for the average guy? The NAACP filing of a discrimination charge using a suit filed back in 2007. Wells Fargo Corp. and HSBC Holdings PLC are the target of separate lawsuits being filed by the NAACP, which alleges the banks were engaged in “systematic, institutionalized racism” in their subprime mortgage lending businesses. The lawsuits, which the NAACP said would be filed in U.S. District Court in California, allege that African-American homeowners were frequently steered into mortgages with higher interest rates than other borrowers with similar credit histories. The two new lawsuits are related to a broader July 2007 lawsuit NAACP filed against some of the nation’s largest lenders for discriminatory lending practices. The allegations against HSBC and Wells Fargo were being filed as a result of subsequent investigations and calls made to the NAACP.

Sub prime lenders are blind to color and racial profiling. They will rip anyone off with no certain preference!

This is a Foreclosure crisis that has yet to reach maximum proportions and that will strangle out the cities of America with lost revenue from a dwindling tax base and add pressure to a country that now needs a socialist tax base in order to survive. A socialist tax base but without any of the programs one could expect in a socialist government.

So, are you a divorce attorney? Can we get your license and ask you . . . what is it you mean to say?