Re: [defend your home from foreclosure] Mortgage Electronic Registration Syst...

[TP...@aol.com]

MARK

 

    I do not think that there are any California cases that have made the right argument to MERS as yet.   I will climb that hill and plant the flag.

 

    My argument is that while MERS has the right to act as the beneficiary, the people who are signing these documents are not MERS people but employees of the foreclosure companies that are pretending to be MERS.

 

    We simply need to unmask these witches for Halloween.

 

YOUR second point is also correct.  Ask for the corporate resolution that appoints these people.   You will find that nobody has personal knowledge of the creation of this document.   It cannot be authenticated as a business record because there are no MERS people to do it.

 

Remember  MERS does not exist in reality that can be established in a court of law.

 

In a message dated 9/20/2011 6:57:34 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ma...@brifmanlawoffice.com writes:

[as much a test to see what happens when I respond via email rather than on the group]

 

I have hesitated to challenge MERS.  Not because I think you are wrong in your analysis (althought it is not quite on the mark, I think), but rather because there are just too many cases that say that since MERS is named as the beneficiary and nominee, it has the right to commence the foreclosure.  That hill is very tall.

 

I suspect that it will have to be climbed, though.

 

Perhaps a better way to attack it (although you have to get by a demurrer to do so) is to get the MERS agreement (I think I got it off their website) and see what it is that they are actually a nominee to do.  They have to be appointed as an agent to do something.

 

Another is that unless the successor to the original lender is also a MERS member, how can MERS be its agent.  I can not appoint you as an agent for another.  That relationship requires the other party's consent.  If the successor is not a MERS member, I wonder what that means?

 

Mark

 

 

 

[Daniel Hanecak]

Mark and Robert:

As to the second point in regards to the authorization agreement. I have raised this issue and no judge is requiring ANY of these places to prove authorization. It is a very difficult, but important issue that needs to be addressed.

Dan