Spire Law Group Seeking Return of $43 Trillion to the United States Treasury. Piggybankblog posted on 10/25/12 Cross linked with. Case cvJBW-RML Document 36 Filed 10/25/12 Page 24 of PageID #: regulators including the Obama Administration not. Case number, cvJBW-RML They said in the NY press she slashed her throat, but that’s not what the wound description was.
|Genre:||Health and Food|
|Published (Last):||13 May 2014|
|PDF File Size:||15.62 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||13.40 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Apart from all Defendants set forth herein, Exhibit A hereto lists subsequent transferee Defendants affiliated with all Defendants herein and which may be added as Doe defendants in the future should sufficient information exist to do so. Defendants herein include some of our leading financial institutions — institutions upon which the Plaintiffs thought they could rely, and did in fact rely upon.
Defendants achieved this by asking each Plaintiff applying for a loan modification to casse the proper application and paperwork.
Archive for: Case No. 12-cv-04269-JBW-RML
The Defendants have concealed the stolen property and other criminally derived proceeds of the illegal scheme since the dates upon which a the banking solvency requirement legally implemented by United States of America on October 19,had been broken and b the TARP program crossed the line of illegality and began Case 1: At all times relevant, Defendants had an affirmative duty to disclose to the Plaintiffs that Defendants had no legal authority to offer loan modifications.
We will be keeping a close eye on both of these stories and provide more details as they become available. When suppressing and concealing from these Plaintiffs the facts and circumstances herein described, the Defendants intended to induce each Plaintiff to alter his position to his harm. Because of the economic meltdown of and beyond, this Ponzi scheme has required the creation of more and more shell entities, and other money-raising vehicles used by Defendants herein in order to support the raising of additional money in order to continue to hide the converted assets.
They do NOT act in the best interest of all of us, period. Finally, each Defendant herein, named or unnamed, did knowingly derive some form of profit or benefit from the acts and omissions described herein.
Full text of “Spire Law Federal Complaint in New York Oct 26, “
All of said intentional misrepresentations and omissions were made by the Defendants with the intent to induce the consuming public, including the Plaintiffs, to enter into mortgage loan transactions that would deprive them of the equity in their homes.
The Defendants should have disclosed these suppressed facts to the Plaintiffs because they were material to the cost-benefit analysis that should have and could have been no.12cv-04269-jbw-rml by each Plaintiff. By these tactics, systems, and delays, Defendants intend to and are in fact buying time as they a accept the benefits of the Ponzi scheme and conversion activities described herein, b cover up their historical conversion and Ponzi scheme, and c make it materially more expensive and difficult for the Plaintiffs to locate their stolen assets and gain recompense.
Defendants did the foregoing no.12-cv-04269-jbw-rjl the intent to convert funds from the Plaintiffs and other members of the public. The predicate acts progressed in a logical fashion as the illegal scheme noo.12-cv-04269-jbw-rml from its core in New York, New York, as it fed no.12-cv-04269-jbw-rm, monies advanced to it by drug cartels, terrorists, Plaintiffs, American citizens and ultimately the Defendants raid of the fed through bailouts, No.12-cv-04269-ubw-rml programs and midnight money printing exercises at the Fed with all Defendants herein assuring that the official Obama administration would have plausible deniability through utilization of the foregoing fraudulent techniques often used by persons in power to corruptly stop enemies from exposing the truth.
No.12-vv-04269-jbw-rml Plaintiffs reasonably relied upon the material misrepresentations of the Defendants to their detriment in choosing to proceed with their mortgage loan transactions. The deceptive acts and practices of the Defendants have had and continue to have a broader impact on consumers at large. Plaintiffs are further entitled to attorney fees. BofA Lawsuit This page has been discontinued. We allege it was a company that underwrote loans in a manner that layered risk factor upon risk factor, such as reduced documentation.
Punitive damages according to proof, as set forth in the applicable causes of action against defendants named therein; 3. Indeed, prior to the theft of their first dollar and their first dossier of private information of the Plaintiffs and other Americans, Defendants — and each of them in conspiracy with all other Defendants -applied to the United States Patent and Trademark Office seeking the approval of thousands of patents detailing complex schemes involving the movement of money, information and assets to secret entities whether located offshore or otherwise.
When suppressing and concealing from the Plaintiffs these material facts as herein alleged, Defendants intended to induce each such Plaintiff to alter his or her position to his or her harm. John-Wright — Join Now! The Defendants have made use of wholly or partially owned foreign companies in an effort to continue to hide and to misrepresent the ownership of the promissory notes executed by the borrowers, including the Plaintiffs, who borrowed funds from them.
The Defendants intentionally misrepresented to the Plaintiffs and to the consuming public in general their intentions regarding the reasonableness and appropriateness of their underwriting procedures in making mortgage loans to the Plaintiffs, and also materially misrepresented to the consuming public that they were not making quality loans when they told the consuming public that they were only making quality, prime home loans.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: In truth, on information and belief, these Defendants had and have no legal right to be demanding such payments from Plaintiffs for any loans or promissory notes or loan modifications at issue herein because these Defendants are not holders or owners of the promissory notes in question and they no longer know who is.
Further, those Defendants that did not actively perform the acts or omissions described in this Complaint did affirmatively aid and abet the other Defendants in the performance of such acts of omissions, before, during or after the fact. InWachovia was the fourth-largest bank holding company in the United States.
Thus, the original lender was paid when it sold the promissory note executed by the borrower, and the MBS pool was also paid in full by virtue of the CDS payments received. Defendants have only claimed that borrowers must be in default, in violation of law, because Defendants can realize more profit and commit more acts of conversion when a borrower is actually in default, i.
The true names and capacities of the Defendants listed herein as DOES 2 through 1, are unknown to Plaintiffs who therefore sue these Defendants by such fictitious names.
Breaking The Silence at While the following quotation, taken from a regulatory report, refers specifically to Countrywide, which was portrayed as a prudent, quality lender, it also applies to the business practices of all Cass. Thus, in taking monies from No.12-cv-04269-jbw-r,l as described above, these Defendants are liable to Plaintiffs herein for conversion, i.
In addition, there is a lot of confusion, even among the mortgage companies, as to the ownership history of many mortgage loans. However, Wachovia began to fail due to its lending practices, including those described herein.
The Dodd-Frank Legislation purports to prohibit the protection of companies deemed too big to fail. Furthermore, the actual acts and omissions of each Defendant individually — and in conspiracy with the other Defendants — are expressly set forth in this Section IV. Our Wall Street friends might also want to show some courage of their own by suggesting that the wealthiest people in this country, like them, start paying their fair share of taxes.
Email required Address never made public. These have included enterprises of each Defendant as set forth herein, that dealt in the converted assets of tens of thousands of American homeowners — 3 To be clear, Plaintiffs make no allegation whatsoever that any Defendant herein — individually or in conspiracy with any other Defendant — has converted any real property.