At some point, the federal government may bow to special interests and try to make it illegal to default — and hold you liable for any and all losses even after you’ve vacated.

-SJ

Mortgages are bundled, sliced-and-diced and sold as investments. These investments circulate worldwide; possession of the note does not mean possession of the document of title(deed).

The legal result of this is two-fold.

1. Assuming the mortgage is paid off, the putative new owner is unable to record his ownership since he doesn’t receive the original of the mortgage. (S)he will never have clear title.

2. In many jurisdictions nationwide, courts are holding that entities initiating foreclosure actions must produce the mortgage, without which they have NO STANDING. Deutsch Bank ran into this in Ohio.

This is called the “Produce the Note” defense. Since the title is not clear, some courts have awarded title to the originator of the mortgage(buyer of the house).

A good start is at: http://chinkinthearmor.net/
All this is easily found via search; try “MERS” and “produce the note.”

For those who debate morality, consider the payment of money to the originator of the loan who has sold the mortgage into the worldwide market for commercial paper. After you’ve finished making payments to the bank or whatever, the originator has been paid twice but the note is still circulating as a legal claim against you.

Wake up.

Right now banks and mortgage companies are getting federal tax dollars from selling mortgages at 100 cents on the dollar to the taxpayers. Every home that goes into foreclosure nets them a market-high profit. In clearer terms, they are selling you the inflated priced home mortgages from before the crash while driving down listed property values so they can buy in dirt cheap and profit from the market reversal. TARP is allowing the same people to get rich coming and going. The real questions are “What are morals?” and “Does America have any?”

Do the people want an economic system that adheres to rigid structures? Anything that impedes the free flow of money in any direction will stifle economic expansion. Maybe we need a new concept of money and what money should be used for?

The question –whether to enter unto jingle mail — concerns one’s ideology, that paradigm of values that governs one’s social behaviour. Now, without wishing to spark counterproductive emotional feelings, I must say that the average American’s knowledge of ‘communist’ or ‘socialist’ theory is shockingly lopsided. Authoritarian communism was a disaster (no surprise there for anyone with a background in human psychology). However, libertarian communist theory (which is a ‘step out’ from classical anarchism) would provide a clear answer to your question. H o w e v e r, I advocate a different model, ‘tenurism’: tenurism straddles classical ‘non-communal property’ and ‘communal property’ relations. (These are two technical terms from communist theory. Capitalism is non-communal. All forms of socialism are ultimately communal.) So, my ‘straddle position’ is as follows: land and water – tenure. Whether you own or rent or whatever, stop paying, and start devolving your world. No government agency can defeat (evict) ANYONE from the house they occupy if there is any amount of solidarity in resisting the evictions.

I look forward to your comments.

Mark Blair, Rocky Gully, W.A., Australia