The way that some of the trusts bought the securities also leaves the trusts open to legal problems.
So I suspect that might be a factor in any decision to sue or not.

And guess what?
Mortgage securities, car loan securities and student loan securities are STILL being sold, all with the same inherent problem of high potential for default on the loans, thus securities being worthless at some point.

yet, assuming the state wins at the very least it takes the money away from those who ended up with it and might possibly do some good for the citizens. Might not be the best solution, but I think better than the status quo.

banksters defrauded the pension funds.

http://stopforeclosurefraud.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Complaint-FINAL-9.16.14.pdf

Investors and homeowners alike were set up to fail with the banksters positioned as the only parties to profit from the scheme.

Real estate law and securities law are two sets of law that were not written with the other in mind. It simply isn’t possible to take a mortgage loan and convert it into a security without violating law somewhere.

Which explains the need for a private land records system namely MERS. If the banksters had used the public land records, anyone could have seen loans pledged to numerous Trusts, each with their own lien upon the same property.

In 6 years of research I have yet to find one instance where a Trust had a lawful lien upon property where a Trust even appears in the chain of Title. In 6 years, I’ve only ever found evidence of non-mortgage backed securities.

Those bogus securities on Wall Street are directly connected to clouded property Titles, lawfully unsecured debt and even “fraudulent and void” mortgages here on Main Street.

When enough states, municipalities, Recorders of Deeds, investors, taxpayers and homeowners come to understand how they were defrauded and take action for accountability, this scheme will crumble and hopefully bury the banksters.

Gee, now I made myself smile.

Wonder what the county assessors would say if DU folks went to each of our county assessors, checked to see if each transfer of title was registered?

As you pointed out some time ago, any mortgage with MERS on it is pretty good indication that the chain of title was not upheld.
Which includes my mortgage, of course.

Scary implications, eh? That means that every single step of turning mortgages into debt bonds, is fraudulent, which means every single pension fund, hedge fund, university fund that holds these bonds, holds ...zero.

This one size fits all approach to securitized mortgage loans simply violates different laws in different states.

Understanding my state laws and my own mortgage loan, helps me better understand how investors were defrauded. I’d like to address those implications and ramifications regarding both the mortgage and the Note and ultimately the mortgage bond investments.

As you know, if the Trust didn’t have a lien upon property to secure the Note before the Trust closed, no mortgage backed securities were created and sold to investors.

In instances where multiple Trusts supposedly owned the same Note - which Trust and which investors actually held bonds in a Trust that had a lawful beneficial interest in the Note? It’s like asking which buyer of the Brooklyn Bridge is the real owner.

There’s more involving the Note. I suspect but didn’t confirm that other states have strict law like my own state of Pennsylvania. After I signed my mortgage documents, the loan originator sold the Note and was paid. In PA when the Note is sold the land records MUST be updated and if not the consequences are not limited to the mortgage which becomes “fraudulent and void.” The law addresses the debt as well. No debt or even a judgment lawfully conveys to the bona fide purchaser of the Note or judgment. So under PA law, not only did Trusts not have liens upon property, but no debt lawfully conveyed to the REMIC’s, Trusts, bonds and investors.

Fannie, a REMIC owns my Note and no lawful debt, not even unsecured debt lawfully passed to them. The only party in the chain that had a claim to debt was the loan originator who is now paid.

Investors weren’t simply defrauded by bogus claims of stable investments, or false ratings from the agencies, or false promises of investments backed by liens upon real property. The beneficial interests they supposedly had in allegedly valuable Promissory Notes may not even amount to unsecured debt, but in reality may be entirely worthless pieces of paper.

None of this is my doing but my mortgage is fraudulent and void and no lawful debt is owed to any party. So which investors were defrauded with my mortgage loan? I do hope they sue the parties who defrauded and damaged them.