Something about Modifications

nomods, on August 30, 2012 at 10:05 pm said:

Leave a Reply

I think I will . You say , something about modifications.and …Im not sure what your saying , but ! “The modification is a critical tool for the servicers , alleged. So is CA CC 2923.5 which is equally oppressive and unjust. One Fed and the other state devisee for recognition purposes.They both act as triggers for “re-cognition ” Yes Neil , under GAAP and provide sufficiency for claims of breach of accounting rules and duties for reporting purposes.For revenue to be recognized, there are two key conditions that must be met according to SFAC 5,Recognition and Measurement in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises. They are:

  1. Completion of the earnings process
    Under this test, the seller must have no significant remaining obligation to the customer. If an order for five hundred football helmets has been placed and only two hundred delivered, the transaction is not complete. Likewise, if the seller is the manufacturer of appliances and promises extensive warranty coverage, it should not book the sale as revenue unless the cost of providing that service (i.e., warranty repair labor and parts) can be reasonably estimated. Additionally, a company that sells a product with an unconditional return policy cannot book the sale until the window has expired (e.g., a company that promises unrestricted returns for cash until ninety days after the sale should not record the revenue until that period has elapsed.)
  2. Assurance of payment
    In order to book revenue, the selling company must be able to reasonably estimate the probability that it will be paid for the order.

Revenue Recognition Method 1: Sales Basis

This is the method that probably makes the most sense to investors. Under the sales basis method, revenue is recognized at the time of sale (defined as the moment when the title of the goods or services is transferred to the buyer.) The sale can be for cash or credit (i.e.,accounts receivable.) This means that revenue is not recognized even if cash is received before the transaction is complete. A magazine publisher, for example, that receives $120 a year for an annual subscription, will only recognize $10 of revenue every month. The reason is simple: if they went out of business, they would have to return a pro-rated portion of the annual subscription price to the customer since it had not yet delivered the merchandise for which it had been paid.

….Brother, how many experts do you have on hand now?

http.//WWW./foreclosurealternative./wordpress.com

Advertisements

Something about Modifications

nomods, on August 30, 2012 at 10:05 pm said:

Leave a Reply

I think I will . You say , something about modifications.and …Im not sure what your saying , but ! “The modification is a critical tool for the servicers , alleged. So is CA CC 2923.5 which is equally oppressive and unjust. One Fed and the other state devisee for recognition purposes.They both act as triggers for “re-cognition ” Yes Neil , under GAAP and provide sufficiency for claims of breach of accounting rules and duties for reporting purposes.For revenue to be recognized, there are two key conditions that must be met according to SFAC 5,Recognition and Measurement in Financial Statements of Business Enterprises. They are:

  1. Completion of the earnings process
    Under this test, the seller must have no significant remaining obligation to the customer. If an order for five hundred football helmets has been placed and only two hundred delivered, the transaction is not complete. Likewise, if the seller is the manufacturer of appliances and promises extensive warranty coverage, it should not book the sale as revenue unless the cost of providing that service (i.e., warranty repair labor and parts) can be reasonably estimated. Additionally, a company that sells a product with an unconditional return policy cannot book the sale until the window has expired (e.g., a company that promises unrestricted returns for cash until ninety days after the sale should not record the revenue until that period has elapsed.)
  2. Assurance of payment
    In order to book revenue, the selling company must be able to reasonably estimate the probability that it will be paid for the order.

Revenue Recognition Method 1: Sales Basis

This is the method that probably makes the most sense to investors. Under the sales basis method, revenue is recognized at the time of sale (defined as the moment when the title of the goods or services is transferred to the buyer.) The sale can be for cash or credit (i.e.,accounts receivable.) This means that revenue is not recognized even if cash is received before the transaction is complete. A magazine publisher, for example, that receives $120 a year for an annual subscription, will only recognize $10 of revenue every month. The reason is simple: if they went out of business, they would have to return a pro-rated portion of the annual subscription price to the customer since it had not yet delivered the merchandise for which it had been paid.

….Brother, how many experts do you have on hand now?

http.//WWW./foreclosurealternative./wordpress.com

What I as an Expert Would Focus on

Plaintiff sould be entitled to examine Defedants books  to determine the accuracy of a book value calculation. The book value is the trust of the attorneys complaint bought to court on behalf of the client plaintiff . Whatever accounting method was employed to reach it, the court have considered as follows:

[E]xplained….the Supreme Court held that regardless of whether book value was an “indefinite” or “ambiguous” term under contract law principles, the unavailability of records to determine a book value made the contract unenforceable. 47 Mo. L. Rev. 345 (1982) http.//www/ foreclosurealternative./wordpress./

In other cases the Nonjudicial Foreclosure under Deed of Trust May Be held as a Fraudulent Transfer of Bankrupt’s Property–Durrett v. Washington National Insurance Co.; because planitff could not examine the books to validate the accuracy of a book value computation. According to M. Soliman …its all about the book  for assets held at the basis. In there is an “unavailability of Defendants books financial records, it would circumvent the Plaintiff from exercising his right to examine the books in order to assess the accuracy of the foreclosure as what is in effect a repurchase and buyout price,” the court wrote.. .  [b]ecause Plaintiff could not validate book value, the “contract cannot be enforced regardless of how the term could be defined,”

Furthermore the court wrote, “…and contrary to the trustees  argument, book value “is not just any value that may be arbitrarily entered upon the books of a company.”

TARP protects Tax Payers not Homeowners

See Section 106. Rights; Management; Sale of Troubled Assets; Revenues and Sale Proceeds.

The concern is raised for Res Judicatta in the conflict for which a matter is already adjudged under the powers granted the Secretary of the Treasury

Needless to say the 2008 passage of the act provides unheralded powers under the office of the secretary that cause, amongst other things, the courts to become crippled and certainly impaired to decide these matters of title holder’s rights and lawful foreclosures.

In the first of several controversies is a constitutional challenge for granting the powers made available to the US government whereby the office of the secretary is not compelled or required in any manner or form to file, enter claims, or allow for public view a sealed In Rem judgment order.

Registerclaims@live.com

Accounting is Substantive where the Law is Theory

The credit bid up is typically set at the amount of the indebtedness. The courts logic is it would be useless to require him to tender cash which would be immediately returned to him. (Central Sav. Bank of Oakland v lake (1927)201 cal.438 447-448, 257 p. 521.) However the mortgagee is not required to open the bidding with a full credit bid but may bid whatever amount he thinks the property is worth.

In a foreclosure held in power of sale the lender mortgagee is transferred the legal title upon declaring the default. This is what enables the beneficiary to elect the substituted trustee to handle his affairs in the recovery of the collateral for the impaired assets held on his books.

Herein one assumes the legal title is allowed to set the price for the value of the property with consideration for the balance outstanding. If no other parties bid at sale the title Reconveyance back to the legal title holder.

My testimony before the US Bankruptcy Court in Santa Ana California stressed this issue of credit bidding and conveyance versus re conveyances is substantive in the event of no other bids. The beneficiary mortgagee enters the value and not a bid, for the full amount of the obligation owing him together with cost and fess due in connection with the accrued cost to carry the impaired mortgage and not the cost limited to the sale.

Herein is how I form the basis for the argument.

If the legal title holder is bidding his own property versus setting the value the mortgagor is in essence constructing a sale with dual consideration. The bid entered would be in excess of the asset carries on the books for the impaired mortgage and would somehow suggest that the credit bid is drawn down against the value of the mortgage.

The value of the mortgage is extinguished by offset at the time the trustee provides a formal Reconveyance for legal title to the estate assuming NO OTHER BIDDERS ENTERED A BID FOR AT SALE.

A beneficiary and mortgagee may also submit an opening value and not a bid, at whatever price it may so elect to do so in accordance with its expectations for keeping the property. If a bidder exceeds the value set then the lender can provide in advance the instructions to the trustee to CREDIT BID in excess of the highest bid in order to keep the asset as an REO.
This is fact and the courts still fail to address the differences in a conveyance for credit bid and Reconveyance of legal title absent any bids.

The case in point is would the trustee enter a second credit bid to keep the property in the event of a third-party investors making a higher bid than the lenders opening credit bid.?

No as this makes no sense at all.

Stop Living the Lies..

145 Responses

  1. nomods, on August 26, 2012 at 11:06 pm said:

    These people on Livinglies web site are disgusting shills. They are there to get people excited about moot arguments. They are there to incite controversy against the banks of the United States and seek to instigate chaos in defaulted homeowners lives. Anything to draw in more desperate homeowners. Its wave after wave…

    Please don’t push the matter Editor, that said with what we already know about your enterprise. Let’s say we have enough class not to spread your dirty laundry .

    The banks are not at fault as it is the Directors of these banks that were allowed to use FDIC tax payer insured funds to promulgate their own investments.  It is alleged the decade long scheme that implemented a uniform instrument bringing together all states was solely in order to ween the banks off their co dependency of the Fed. for over the counter short-term yields and borrowing.

    Your homes were taken unencumbered under the accounting rules of FAS 140 to pledge as collateral to for trading 30 60 and 90 days commercial paper rates and to swap out for overseas Libor based 3 month and 6 month yields. 

    Unbelievable!

    Your homes debt was converted to equity and the title transferred unencumbered subject to all liens of record which allegedly stands for a commercial UCC filing to secure the FDIC bank lines. How we ask in a bankrupt and remote isolated entity in an offshore enterprise account.

    You cannot have a UCC fling on a warehouse line converted into common stock and then diluted into preferred shares in coordination with a five-year bond sold to foreign banks. The LA Times chief writer said he did not want to hear any of it Really ? 

    The mortgage was abated when it was transferred into common stock. The UCC is filed against the bank lines converted to common stock representing the equity in your home.This in part is why we ask – “how in the world can a first and second deed of trust or mortgage survive with a UCC filings against one and the same collateral .

    Is there an answer? Oh we have your attention. Now we can get off the Robo Signor drama . . .

    Land patents and Hobo signatures are a loss leader or draw to lead you away from the real arguments and Livinglies site must come clean. Either this information is known or they are concealing the facts or those sites are incompetent to stand as a witness or act as an intelligent purveyor of valuable information.

    I hear all the time “how does he know?”

    It’s never a complete sentence that should end with “….he is not a member of the Bar!”  Who is more crooked . . .those web sites and quite title fools or the suckered attorneys who sucker clients , each falling for the bait of modifications and causes of action to prosecute bankers long after the statute of limitations has run its course.

    Look, assuming the attorneys do not already know . . .they lose their license for interfering with national security in a mass recovery to marshal in US assets lost to overseas banks.

    Modifications suck the next six payments from a desperate household. Then foreclosure schemes do the same, like those who offer internet securitization audits and land or procedures patent gibberish.  

    Stop the pain and fight the last right fight using substantive arguments that makes use of common sense  Look for yourself at the short-term commercial paper rate from 1996, the time of birth for MERS Corp and uniform instrument called a security deed. Starting in 2002 we culminate the first five-year bond cycle experiment with Wells Fargo and Bank of America. From 5.4 percent down to 1.50 .and then to .500BPS in 2002 . Five more years later and whoops. . . back up to 5.5 percent.

    Yet they still made loans in 2006 and 2007 and then its the passage of TARP and the EESA in October of 2008. Then whoops again. . .as always….Fed. intervention and short-term rates are down to 44 BPS.

    By then the party is over.

    http.\\www.foreclosurealternattive.\wordpress.com
    registerclaims@live.com

    For informational purposes only I am not an attorney nor are the other users of this registrations comments and views. Note – only an attorney can advise your of your rights . Call your state Bar for more information.

    ‘.

M.Soliman

  1. I will not condone this type of unnecessary arguing amongst different views. My view is what it is and theat is the tact I am asking attorneys to consider. Everyone is entitled to an opinion and these people are ever bit entitled to foster their views whatever the may be. If the mortgage is affirmed sold the entities books are available and shall demonstrate a gain or loss on the sale. This is the substantive element of the matter brought into a court of law.
  2. If alleged to have not sold the mortgage remains as a booked asset and therefore remains with the originating lender held on its financial statements.
  3. The funds used to settle the consumer household mortgage were provided by the Defedants lender warehouse bank and FDIC commercial securities financing and credit line provider. The FDIC member banks offer lenders the financing needed to wire good funds into the settlement agent at time of the mortgage loans closing.

Disclaimer

DISCLAIMER – I am not an attorney and all comments and views herein or shared otherwise are never meant to be considered legal advice. I am an expert witness who testifies in court and thus I am not allowed to practice law as only a licensed Bar Member can practice law and help you to determine your rights. It is illegal to give advice and to practice law without a license. The above mentioned information and all information given that is associated with this ID and internet log in account is for discussion , informational purposes, personal comments and non binding views. Such informational content is not for legal purposes nor to be construed as such and nothing under the domain ID account log in name is ever intended to be used as legal advice or presumed offered for claims brought in a court of law. Consult your local bar for the name of attorneys near you who can assist you in legal matters..

The truth hurts

masterservicer, on August 25, 2012 at 9:35 pm said:

Mary yes,

This is Soliman commenting and I’m sorry someone spoke out of line from our cooperative [joint effort site.]
YES – what I am TELLING YOU is the homeowner is a loser no matter what, …That is what his message attempts to say.
You have lost your home regardless and this is evidenced by Obama having to Marshall in all US Homes from foreign investors. The good news – there is No loan to foreclose upon . The bad is administrative civil forfeiture by the Dept of Treasury . Read TARP my friend. This effort appears to be suppressed till after the election.
A major newspaper told me to leave the issue alone. Really.

Yes this is correct.

You have defenses that are few and the State Bar knows this and I believe they have asked attorneys to focus in on BS modifications and gibberish claims to make money . This is why I am attacked over and over again.This of course does not sell seminars and books nor encourage retainer fees ….so its being kept hush.

File the right claim is all I am saying . ..please listen !

http:\\www.foreclosurealternative.\word press.\com