BANK CONDUCT APPROACHING THE SURREAL AND UNCONSCIONABLE

December 17, 2017

Mr. Barnes has recently been retained in a case where a known foreclosure mill foreclosed on the client’s property in a lawsuit which was filed against a different borrower. The mill put the wrong legal description into the foreclosure case (that of the client, and not the named homeowner defendant), and the client’s home was sold to the Bank of New York as securitization trustee after a “default”, which the client obviously knew nothing about as she was not named as a Defendant in the case. The foreclosure mill refused to correct the mistake. Mr. Barnes is thus initiating litigation against the foreclosure mill and its client (Bank of New York as a securitization trustee) for quiet title and significant damages.

In a separate case, Citibank as the securitization trustee had, since 2014, claimed to be the “holder” of the clients’ Note and Deed of Trust, and substituted itself in to the foreclosure case. Although the party which was substituted out (U.S. Bank as securitization trustee) submitted a credit bid at the sale, Citibank purchased the property and was issued a trustee’s deed and certificate of purchase and thereafter initiated eviction proceedings which Mr. Barnes has consolidated into a separate foreclosure challenge case which he had previously filed.

Mr. Barnes took the deposition of Citibank’s designated representative (from Ocwen), who testified under oath that Citibank NEVER had ANY interest in the loan; should not have filed the foreclosure case or the eviction case, and that the loan was never, ever, placed into a Citibank securitization trust. Mr. Barnes has filed an action to this reverse the entire foreclosure and for damages against Citibank.

Jeff Barnes, Esq., www.ForeclosureDefenseNationwide.com

Leave a Reply