*from the article “Basic Property Law Trumps Esoteric Pretender Lender Arguments at LivingLies.Wordpress.com

FROM
THE COMMENT SECTION THANK YOU ANDREW: I THINK HE’S GOT IT!  

There is no
getting away from the fact that the lender is the investor and that
anyone else whose name was inserted in the documentation did so not
only without authority but as an intentional misrepresentation as part
of a fraudulent scheme
to sell financial products at huge profits to
homeowners and investors based upon false representations as to both
quality and value.

As it looks from the outside, the lenders
never registered the (mortgage liens against) properties in the “trusts” that were created for
the purpose of holding the real estate, the real estate will be in most
instances still registered in the (note) Grantor/Homeowner’s name in public land
records.

Therefore the supposed note, deed of trust and or alleged mortgage
that was to be registered against the real estate in the trust [ that
is vacant] has no security.

Here is the other opinion continuing from above, if this was not
a loan, since banks don’t lend money unless they have Investments /
CD’s (collateral) as Matching Finance to loan against, this must have
been an INVESTMENT in the homeowner, since the lenders issued
securities against a “Note”
that was to be an investment, and this is
a form of a Bankers Acceptance [ BA] endorseable note, except that the
creator of the note (lender) was not privy to the makings of other transactions.
Not so!

All companies proposing to sell the investment, market a prospectus
or in any way be involved in securities must be registered at the http://www.SEC.gov/index.htm website.

Advertisements