Member Banks are allegedly using dozens of accounts at several brokerage firms in bouts of manipulative trading activity
Traders are allegedly manipulating prices of 100’s of private label exchanges restricted shares representing mortgages that have a direct impact on the banks New York Stock Exchange- and Nasdaq-listed shares resulting in millions in illegal profits since 2013.
Regulators, law enforcement, and the exchanges have access to technology to see, and track, manipulative trading that, in this case happens day in and out .
A 10 year installment contract is not a 30 year mortgage and this is where the problem arises . Households lose their home arguing something that has nothing to do with the divestiture of the mortgage and home into a ten year contract and certificate of deposit.
Institutional lies – all lies !
OID is a zero-coupon bond.THEY ARE FORECLOSING ON ZERO GET IT .
THE COURT ORDER IS FOR A PUNITIVE TAX LEVIED AND COLLECTED AT THAT TIME –
An original issue discount (OID) is the discount from par value at the time a bond or other debt instrument is issued; it is the difference between the stated redemption price at maturity and the actual issue price.
The most extreme example of an OID is a zero-coupon bond. A Zero coupon bond is the means and method for alternative securitization by pledged assets . Its by a CD in your name that YOU abandoned.
Generally, under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) § 61(a)(12) cancellation of debt (COD) is taxable as ordinary income.
However, under certain circumstances such income can be excluded under IRC § 108 where, the COD occurs as a result of a discharge in a title 11 bankruptcy case (IRC § 108(a)(1)(A)), where the discharge occurs when the taxpayer is insolvent (IRC § 108(a)(1)(B)), where the indebtedness discharged is qualified farm indebtedness (IRC § 108(a)(1)(C)), where the indebtedness discharged is qualified real property business indebtedness (IRC § 108(a)(1)(D)), or . . .
where the indebtedness discharged is qualified principal residence indebtedness which is discharged before January 1, 2013 (IRC § 108(a)(1)(E), the “2007 Mortgage Relief Act”).
Its unconscionable for a popular web site to offer to assist with its army of attorneys when they were not on the correct page.
The popular blog site gave various undocumented and far fetched legal antidotes and unproven methods of aiding persons in foreclosure. None of these remedies ever dealt with the problematic issues of a borrower not paying its mortage and C.F.R. 1.751 Constructive Liquidation.
The common law courts have long held the Innocent thrid party purchaser doctrine. That is a third party investor who is brought into a scheme is always entitled to its money returned. This is exactly what banks were banking on sort to speak. Having the courts enforce the innocent thrid party purchaser rule when in fact there was no thrid party the court could identify
MERS Corp is that phantom party the represents the divestiture of the asset. In divestment there is no innocent third party as the borrowers equity is transferred to corpus and amortized down to zero over the next ten years from funding. The I.R.C. Section 1033 ; 180 (i) ; 61 (a) (1) and C.F.R. 1.751 are certain to this fact – that all foreclosures must be part of a constructive liquidation at zero .
Accordingly you cannot foreclose on a zero balance and this is the contention the popular web site never grasped nor provided to its readers.
For more information write email@example.com
The legacy is where the home sold at orgination and the default was scheduled using a dated coded system. Plead what you will and believe what you will counsel …there is no mortage to speak of here in the Legacy variety .
Here we have the Installment Sale Basics where the gain or loss from the sale is usually recognized upon any sale exchange or other disposition of property. IRC § 1001. That time of recognition is on the day of the foreclosure and this is the proverbial scam.
See IRC § 453 where it does not exclude gain from income, but in some situations
permits a taxpayer to recognize gain from the disposition of property when
the taxpayer receives cash or property other than the buyer’s promise to pay in the future.
• Example: Joe Blow owns land in Kokomo held by Taxpayer as a capital asset. Taxpayer sells land back to Buyer. Buyer who in this case is the Lender does not pay Taxpayer cash at the “orgination” closing. Instead, Lender gives Taxpayer MERS a promissory note requiring Buyer to pay the purchase price in cash 10 years later. Taxpayer MERS is eligible to use the installment sale accounting method under IRC § 453, Taxpayer MERS does not recognize any gain from the sale of the consumers land until the tax year in which it receives payment under the note.
You need accountants to audit your file before you enter a pleaded response. If not us do find an accountant to come to your aid under counter claims that IRC 453 and a 10 years tax deferred sale is NOT a mortgage.
Otherwise your left with little shot of any kind of successful outcome. Also available to audit foreclosure with regards to attorney client malpractice suits.
Contact us for arranging an audit before your case makes it into court.
Someone , a reader of course sent us a genuine heartfelt message that read –
“Put up or shut up!” It continued “… now crack this loan number.”
We take it they are referring to the file number or sequence ID provided to us as follows: 011-6047712. So we like to accommodate our blog readers and entertain those other non-believers or persons skeptical of conspiracy theorists.
Take a look!
At face value it does not look like much but recall all we are looking for is an opening into your case and the lawyers arguments. And here we found a huge open door to commence the investigation into a coded and manipulative fictitious foreclosure.
 See the dates and installment values along with the prices per share to the far right ? Under case of United States v. Kirby Lumber one can argue the price per share for MBS takes a sudden nose dive in favor of the lender and avoiding taxes . United States v. Kirby Lumber Co., 284 U.S. 1 (1931),  this was the landmark case in which the United States Supreme Court held that when a corporation settles its debts for less than the face amount, a taxable gain has occurred.
What we believe we unearthed in addition to the price manipulation down to 2.93 price per share and  prepaid mortage through 2033 is  code “1071.”
This is frustrating …. that 1071 alleged to be coded does look familiar !
Keep reading and be your own judge!
Section 1071 – The Dodd-Frank Act
SEC. 1071. SMALL BUSINESS DATA COLLECTION. (a) IN GENERAL.—The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (15 U.S.C. 1691 et seq.) is amended by inserting after …
What does this all mean ?
Hire the experts to assist you in your case
Write us at firstname.lastname@example.org