CODY BREWER ON MORTGAGES , SPECIAL DEPOSIT TO RECLAIM YOUR

MORTGAGE

NOTICE : This article is the copyrighted material of Cody Brewer. This information is to be
SHARED FREELY and is NOT FOR SALE, or TO SELL. Anyone caught selling this article
without express permission of Cody Brewer and you will be sued to the fullest extent of the law.

By statute, assignment of the mortgage carries with it the assignment of the debt. . .
Indeed, in the event that a mortgage loan somehow separates interests of the note
and the Mortgage, with the Mortgage lying with some independent entity, the
mortgage may become unenforceable. The practical effect of splitting the Mortgage
from the promissory note is to make it impossible for the holder of the note to
foreclose, unless the holder of the Mortgage is the agent of the holder of the note.
Without the agency relationship, the person holding only the trust will never
experience default because only the holder of the note is entitled to payment of the
underlying obligation. The mortgage loan becomes ineffectual when the note holder
did not also hold the Mortgage.”

1. Generally, if the Mortgage and the Note are not together with the same entity,
there can be no legal enforcement of the Note. The Mortgage enforces the Note and
provides the capability for the lender to foreclose on the property. Thus, if the
Mortgage and the Note are separated, foreclosure legally cannot occur. The Note
cannot be enforced by the Mortgage if each contains a different
mortgagee/beneficiary; and, if the Mortgage is not itself a legally enforceable
instrument, there can be no valid foreclosure on the homeowners’ property.

2. No Entity can be a CREDITOR if they do not hold/own the asset in question (i.e.
the NOTE and/or the property); a Mortgage Pass Through Trust (i.e. R.E.M.I.C., as
defined in Title 26, Subtitle A, Chapter 1, Subchapter M, Part II §§ 850-862) cannot
hold assets, for if they do, their tax exempt status is violated and the Trust itself is
void ab initio. This is an indication that either the Trust has either voided its
intended Tax Free Status, or the asset is not in fact owned by it.

3. In the event that the loan was sold, pooled and turned into a security, such event
would indicate that the alleged holder can no longer claim that it is a real party of
interest, as the original lender has been paid in full.

4. Further said, once the Note was converted into a stock, or stock equivalent, that
event would indicate that the Note is no longer a Note. If both the Note and the
stock, or stock equivalent, exist at the same time, that is known as double dipping.
Double dipping is a form of securities fraud. (Yes, cuz ur house, ur car is SECURITY)

5. Once a loan has been securitized, which the aforementioned loan may have been
done many times, that event would indicate that the loan forever loses its security
component (i.e., the Mortgage), and the right to foreclose through the Mortgage is
forever lost.

6. The findings of this report indicate that the Promissory Note has been converted
into a stock as a permanent fixture. As a stock it is governed as a stock under the
rules and regulations of the SEC; hence, the requirement for the filings of the
registration statements, pooling and servicing agreements, form 424B-5, et.al. There
is no evidence on Record to indicate that the Mortgage was ever transferred
concurrently with the purported legal transfer of the Note, such that the Mortgage
and Note has been irrevocably separated, thus making a nullity out of the purported
security in a property, as claimed.

7. Careful review and examination reveals that this was a securitized loan. The
Assignment of Mortgage pretended to be an A to D transaction when in fact the
foreclosing party was hiding the A to B, B to C, and C to D facts of true sales, where A
is the original lender, B the sponsor/seller, C the bankruptcy-remote depositor, and
D, the issuing mortgage-backed securities trust.

They also hid the legal SEC filings, governing the transaction according to our
findings. But to be controlled by those SEC filings, the true original loan Note and
Mortgage had to be provided by the Document Custodian certified to have been in
possession of them by A CUTOFF DATE.

Because it was not, the claim of ownership by the Trust cannot be substantiated and
the loan servicing rights not established at law by agreement. Examiner supplies
this report as written testimony and is available for oral testimony.

Now...here is what the UCC says about securities....In UCC 8-102 (a)(1) it states
claimant has a property interest in a financial asset. Financial Asset means a
security!

This is an Article 8 Adverse Claim. UCC 8-102 (9) financial Asset is a security. UCC
3-306 CLAIMS TO AN INSTRUMENT says a person taking an instrument OTHER
THAN A HOLDER IN DUE COURSE IS SUBJECT TO A CLAIM OF A PROPERTY OR
POSSESSIONARY RIGHT IN THE INSTRUMENT OR ITS PROCEEDS.

**A PERSON HAVING RIGHTS OF HOLDER IN DUE COURSE TAKES FREE OF THE
CLAIMS OF THE INSTRUMENT! UCC 3-103 (7) SAYS...MAKER-A PERSON WHO
SIGNS OR IS IDENTIFIED IN A NOTE AS PERSON UNDERTAKING TO PAY.

UCC 3-105 ISSUE OF INSTRUMENT- (c) says- issued instruments mean maker or
drawer of an instrument. BOTTEM LINE IS THEY MAKE YOU A PARTY TO AN
INVESTMENT CONTRACT AND THEY DO NOT DISCLOSE THAT TO YOU!!
YOU HAVE A PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN THE SALE OF THE SECURITY!!!!
WHERE IS OUR CHECK ??????
David. . . i get that part.. but what happens when you have companies like quicken
loans and other online lenders, who don’t call themselves "banks" but just mortgage
brokers?? AND . . . NONE OF THEM ARE Banks

Cody - They are all acting as brokers and dealing in securities. DID they pay the tax
on all those transactions??? HMMM

David - so how are they "loaning" or creating mortgages?? I’m trying to help my
son.. he thinks I’m crazy... he’s got great credit and he's in the process of closing on a
house... what do I tell him...PM me if necessary...

Cody - they aren't creating LOANS !!! That is the whole point of my post. They
NEVER lend you any of their own money. It was YOUR promissory note you signed. .
. they receive as cash from you, which they use to negotiate with investors and they
turn around and give you back a loan plus interest. That note is then securitized and
traded over and over and over again and insured many times over. So if a loan goes
into default, if there are 20 insurers ALL OF THEM get paid 100% of the loan value.
Can you inure your car 20 times over?????

Your signature is what creates the money!!

David - So I should tell my son to tell Quicken " as a result of me signing this
promissory note, please provide me with the accounting that shows you lent me
the money on the purchase (house)- is that there is a negative balance from
Quickens bank that as a result of this transaction.. or better yet, give me the check
for the amount of the house, Ill pay the owner and I’ ll pay you monthly...? Isnt that
what should be happening?

Al - tell them you want copies of the Trust that its going into, the B5 Prospectus, the
8K Section 2.01, and Pooling and Service agreement, and I would provide them
a 1099A at closing making them the Borrower.

Cody - they will freak out. . . . because here is what will happen, a few months down
the road they will assign the servicing rights to a servicer, who acts as a pass-
through and that servicer just takes a small fee from the payment. Ask them if the
Note follows the mortgage. Ask them if both the note and the mortgage made it into
the REMIC.

David - what will they do if someone does this at closing?? I’m sure he wont get the
house...lol..
Cody - Well, tell them if they want to come to the big boy table and use your
signature to make money it will cost them because once it is securitized your note is
paid off 10x over through investments. Yet they still try to make you make the
payments. However . . . guess what your loan payments represent ???
THE TAX AND INTEREST FOR THE TRUST!!!!

THEY ARE TRYING TO MAKE YOU RESPONSIBLE FOR THE INTEREST.

I would also give them a 1099 OID hahahaha

If you are a party to an investment contract should you not have some say in the
transaction?

David - I agree.. my son will think I’m nuts . . . doesn't he have to be a SPC?

Cody - No, this is UCC Law, Trust Law.

David - do you think you could feasibly get these guys (Quicken) to include us in
the profits that are being made by these transactions? And how can we do it...
separate contracts at the closing table? unfortunately they are all online...which in
itself is treachery - don't you think? How can I save my son.. he's closing in a
week...smh..
*************************************************
Cody - For the mortgage or car loan...because they are the same!!!: They receive the
Promissory note from you as cash and then turn around and give it back to you in
the form of a loan. They take the promissory note and put it into a pooling and
service agreement and securitize the note. It is traded as a security on the market as
a collateralized debt obligation. In reality your loan was paid at closing. THE ONLY
WAY YOU CAN WIN IN COURT.....is by invoking a court of equity due to constructive
fraud. If you file as Plaintiff, you are waiving juris. Therefore, you must file in
response as a counter claim and cross. In your filing, you must DO IT IN EQUITY.
A court of law cannot recognize equity!!!!!!! it must go something like
this...(NAME IS FOR EXAMPLE)

Respondent Ashley-Vincent:Family of David is before this Court of Record by

Special Appearance and as the Executor of the Legal and Equitable Estate of the
Decedent ASHLEY VINCENT DAVID, to invoke this Court’s Special Equity
Jurisdiction as a Court of Chancery, due to the fact there exists by operation of law
a Constructive Trust with the Movants as Constructive Trustees, due to their
acts of Fraud in Transferring, Conveying and Conversion of Respondent’s Estate,
Real Estate and Loan Documents including but not limited to the Deed of Trust and
Promissory Note, acts of undue influence, breach of fiduciary duty, failure to
disclose, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, tortuous interference with
inheritance rights, abuse of process, tortuous misfeasance and nonfeasance, and
Conspiracy to defraud.
Such causes of action also will support a claim for equitable relief.

Notice is hereby given to the Movants and this Court as a Court of Special Equity in
Chancery, that this Motion for a 30 day continuance is being made by Special
Deposit to maintain Legal and Equitable title of Respondent as the Beneficiary of the
Deed of Trust and Estate by the merging of Legal and Equitable title by the re-
recording of the Deed of Trust as the Donor-Grantor-Beneficiary and as a Special
Deposit. As it was not the intent or purpose of the Respondent to enter into an
unconscionable or fraudulent transaction or contract with the Movants.

Respondent alleges that there is no Plain, Speedy or Adequate Remedy at law and
that these proceedings are counter to equity and that this proceeding could
irreparably damage His rights to title, land, property and interest on a Private Trust
now established by Special Deposit before this court. Because Courts of Special
Equity or Chancery Courts have exclusive jurisdiction over Private Trusts and
Special Deposits, Respondents are moving this Special Court of Equity in Chancery
to impose a Constructive Trust on Movants which may necessitate the filing of an
adversarial proceeding under Bankruptcy Rule 7001 of Part VII, which will
necessitate a 30 day extension on the July 13, 2011 hearing for the lifting of the
automatic stay.

This Motion or Application is being made on the following grounds and is supported
by the attached Declaration and Memorandum of Points & Authorities in support
thereof:

Movants are not the Lenders or Beneficiaries of record as Movants treated

Respondent’s Promissory Note as a a Draft and not a liability instrument and
used it to pay the seller for the property as evidenced by their indorsement of the
Note as an Order to Pay and did not give Respondent any consideration to
support contract as evidenced by their lack of signature on any of the Loan
Documents, including but not limited to the Deed of Trust and Promissory Note.
I.
The United States Bankruptcy Court for Northern District of California has the
power and authority as a Special Court of Equity in Chancery by Special Deposit and
upon a proper showing by the Respondent to impose a Constructive Trust under
§105(a) of 11 U.S.C.A.

“Constructive trust” is equitable remedy to prevent unjust enrichment and enforce

restitution, under which one who wrongfully acquires property of another holds it
involuntarily as constructive trustee, and trust extends to property acquired in
exchange for that wrongfully taken. Coppinger v. Superior Court of Orange County
(App. 4 Dist. 1982) 185 Cal. Rptr. 24, 14 Cal. App.3d 883.
AN Afterthought by me. . .IMHO - What the trustee is doing is referred to as
"Repudiation".

Repudiation Definition: denial of the existence of a contract and/or refusal to

perform a contract obligation. Repudiation is an anticipatory breach of a contract.
(See: contract, anticipatory breach)

The Grantor failed to stipulate in the trust indenture the trustee can not repudiate
their duties to perform as prescribed in the indenture. Therefore, the trustee can
repudiate per trust law.

To perform on the security. He has limited of legal title and you, the beneficiary,
have equitable title a/k/a equitable interest. What they do is turn it around and
presume to be the beneficiary and that you're the trustee. THIS IS ONE OF THE
MOST VALUABLE NUGGETS OF KNOWLEDGE OR ANY PATRIOT.

MORTGAGE

Nowhere is this more clear than with a mortgage. It's worded to make the bank the
beneficiary and give all of the trustee's duties to the Grantor. This would be
laughable if not so sick. But the beauty is…IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT THE
DOCUMENT SAYS.

MORTGAGE NOTE

Don't they enter the note as an asset (actually as an increase in assets, a debit on the
left side of a T chart)?

Prior to 1933, a promissory note was evidence of the issuer's liability. After 1933, it
became an asset to the bank. They offset the asset posting with a liability posting on
the right side of the equation (an increase in liabilities, meaning a credit on the right
side of a T chart). Those are the liabilities that they owe you which they ignore
through accounting trickery, but that's another topic.

REVERSE MORTGAGE

EVERY MORTGAGE IS A REVERSE MORTGAGE if you understand that its not

the words in the mortgage that matters.

It's the security, not the words in it. When we hand the bank attorney the mortgage,
he and the bank become the trustee ON THE TRUST CREATED BY THE TRANSFER
OF THE SECURITY. And if you have a security interest in that instrument, the
mortgage is DEAD ON ARRIVAL if you know what you're doing.

But now it's years later. Too late, right? Wrong. It's about how the security is
deposited and exchanged. You're right, First Mate. The exchange is retroactive (nunc
pro tunc) to the day the mortgage was issued. This is a huge defect in most people's
procedures.

You're also right in the third paragraph of your email. If they don't perform, they've
breached, the trust collapses, and they're obligated to return all of your securities,
including the one's they traded through Fidelity.

Doesn't mean banks will rollover. You've got to have status.

Disclaimer… Not Legal advice… please seek counsel if you are involved in a
Foreclosure or anticipate one in the future.