MORTGAGE RIGHTS
 The New Foreclosure Defenses Botched Securitization
What I mean by botched securitization is the failure to securitize the loans strictly following the instructions in the PSA. Examples are: the note is lost the note has not been endorsed correctly the loan was not conveyed to the trust before the securitization closed Botched securitization is very important in foreclosure defense. If the loan was not conveyed to the trust properly, it does not belong to the trust and the loan servicer does not have authority to collect payments, assess fees and costs, or otherwise deal with the loan. There are two ways to make the argument that the loan does not belong to the trust. The first way argues that the court must follow New York trust law, which holds that the conveyance instructions must be followed strictly. If they are not, the loan does not belong to the trust. The second approach relies on the language in the PSA. PSAs provide that the trust only owns "Mortgage Loans," and that the loan servicer is only authorized to deal with "Mortgage Loans." "Mortgage Loans" are only loans that have been conveyed to the trust properly. Foreclosure lawyers have tried to use botched securitization to stop foreclosure actions before they can really get started by arguing that the plaintiff (the party who is trying to foreclose on the home) does not have "standing" unless the loan belongs to the trust. The banks' argument, believe it or not, is that it does not matter whether the trust owns the note because, "even a thief can enforce a note." The banks are relying on negotiable instrument law, which grew up when ships carrying freight still had sails. The banks win all the time. The botched securitization defense does not work as a standing argument because the plaintiff does not have to prove that it owns the note. Under negotiable instruments law, the plaintiff in the foreclosure case only has to prove that it has possession of the note. That is not to say, however, that we should give up on botched securitization. In the next section, we will review the Dernier case, and discuss how to use botched securitization as an affirmative defense. Additionally, the botched transfer to the trust, in my opinion, has not been fully explored. Finally, if you live in a title theory state, you should read my posts on the Yvanova decision by the California Supreme Court.
NEXT: Dernier Lost or Stolen Notes
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
The site does not provide legal advice. Neither Susan LaCava nor her law firm, LaCava Law, S.C., represent you until there is a signed retainer agreement.
 The New Foreclosure Defenses Botched Securitization What I mean by botched securitization is the failure to securitize the loans strictly following the instructions in the PSA. Examples are: the note is lost the note has not been endorsed correctly the loan was not conveyed to the trust before the securitization closed Botched securitization is very important in foreclosure defense. If the loan was not conveyed to the trust properly, it does not belong to the trust and the loan servicer does not have authority to collect payments, assess fees and costs, or otherwise deal with the loan. There are two ways to make the argument that the loan does not belong to the trust. The first way argues that the court must follow New York trust law, which holds that the conveyance instructions must be followed strictly. If they are not, the loan does not belong to the trust. The second approach relies on the language in the PSA. PSAs provide that the trust only owns "Mortgage Loans," and that the loan servicer is only authorized to deal with "Mortgage Loans." "Mortgage Loans" are only loans that have been conveyed to the trust properly. Foreclosure lawyers have tried to use botched securitization to stop foreclosure actions before they can really get started by arguing that the plaintiff (the party who is trying to foreclose on the home) does not have "standing" unless the loan belongs to the trust. The banks' argument, believe it or not, is that it does not matter whether the trust owns the note because, "even a thief can enforce a note." The banks are relying on negotiable instrument law, which grew up when ships carrying freight still had sails. The banks win all the time. The botched securitization defense does not work as a standing argument because the plaintiff does not have to prove that it owns the note. Under negotiable instruments law, the plaintiff in the foreclosure case only has to prove that it has possession of the note. That is not to say, however, that we should give up on botched securitization. In the next section, we will review the Dernier case, and discuss how to use botched securitization as an affirmative defense. Additionally, the botched transfer to the trust, in my opinion, has not been fully explored. Finally, if you live in a title theory state, you should read my posts on the Yvanova decision by the California Supreme Court.
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
The site does not provide legal advice. Neither Susan LaCava nor her law firm, LaCava Law, S.C., represent you until there is a signed retainer agreement.
 The New Foreclosure Defenses Botched Securitization What I mean by botched securitization is the failure to securitize the loans strictly following the instructions in the PSA. Examples are: the note is lost the note has not been endorsed correctly the loan was not conveyed to the trust before the securitization closed Botched securitization is very important in foreclosure defense. If the loan was not conveyed to the trust properly, it does not belong to the trust and the loan servicer does not have authority to collect payments, assess fees and costs, or otherwise deal with the loan. There are two ways to make the argument that the loan does not belong to the trust. The first way argues that the court must follow New York trust law, which holds that the conveyance instructions must be followed strictly. If they are not, the loan does not belong to the trust. The second approach relies on the language in the PSA. PSAs provide that the trust only owns "Mortgage Loans," and that the loan servicer is only authorized to deal with "Mortgage Loans." "Mortgage Loans" are only loans that have been conveyed to the trust properly. Foreclosure lawyers have tried to use botched securitization to stop foreclosure actions before they can really get started by arguing that the plaintiff (the party who is trying to foreclose on the home) does not have "standing" unless the loan belongs to the trust. The banks' argument, believe it or not, is that it does not matter whether the trust owns the note because, "even a thief can enforce a note." The banks are relying on negotiable instrument law, which grew up when ships carrying freight still had sails. The banks win all the time. The botched securitization defense does not work as a standing argument because the plaintiff does not have to prove that it owns the note. Under negotiable instruments law, the plaintiff in the foreclosure case only has to prove that it has possession of the note. That is not to say, however, that we should give up on botched securitization. In the next section, we will review the Dernier case, and discuss how to use botched securitization as an affirmative defense. Additionally, the botched transfer to the trust, in my opinion, has not been fully explored. Finally, if you live in a title theory state, you should read my posts on the Yvanova decision by the California Supreme Court.
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
The site does not provide legal advice. Neither Susan LaCava nor her law firm, LaCava Law, S.C., represent you until there is a signed retainer agreement.
 The New Foreclosure Defenses Botched Securitization What I mean by botched securitization is the failure to securitize the loans strictly following the instructions in the PSA. Examples are: the note is lost the note has not been endorsed correctly the loan was not conveyed to the trust before the securitization closed Botched securitization is very important in foreclosure defense. If the loan was not conveyed to the trust properly, it does not belong to the trust and the loan servicer does not have authority to collect payments, assess fees and costs, or otherwise deal with the loan. There are two ways to make the argument that the loan does not belong to the trust. The first way argues that the court must follow New York trust law, which holds that the conveyance instructions must be followed strictly. If they are not, the loan does not belong to the trust. The second approach relies on the language in the PSA. PSAs provide that the trust only owns "Mortgage Loans," and that the loan servicer is only authorized to deal with "Mortgage Loans." "Mortgage Loans" are only loans that have been conveyed to the trust properly. Foreclosure lawyers have tried to use botched securitization to stop foreclosure actions before they can really get started by arguing that the plaintiff (the party who is trying to foreclose on the home) does not have "standing" unless the loan belongs to the trust. The banks' argument, believe it or not, is that it does not matter whether the trust owns the note because, "even a thief can enforce a note." The banks are relying on negotiable instrument law, which grew up when ships carrying freight still had sails. The banks win all the time. The botched securitization defense does not work as a standing argument because the plaintiff does not have to prove that it owns the note. Under negotiable instruments law, the plaintiff in the foreclosure case only has to prove that it has possession of the note. That is not to say, however, that we should give up on botched securitization. In the next section, we will review the Dernier case, and discuss how to use botched securitization as an affirmative defense. Additionally, the botched transfer to the trust, in my opinion, has not been fully explored. Finally, if you live in a title theory state, you should read my posts on the Yvanova decision by the California Supreme Court.
 MORTGAGE RIGHTS
The site does not provide legal advice. Neither Susan LaCava nor her law firm, LaCava Law, S.C., represent you until there is a signed retainer agreement.  MORTGAGE RIGHTS