[Kingside]

No, obviously MERS mortgages have their legal problems, what I mean is what the DC attorney general is doing is pure politics. And now it appears to be accepted as fact on the internet.

But to me, all this hoopla about MERS “violating the law” because the true assignee of the mortgage is hidden, ergo, there is some sort of fraud or violation of recording statutes really misses the point.

I can buy a property from you, and get delivery of a grant deed. Once I do that, I own the property whether I choose to record it or not. If I choose not to record the grant deed, I am taking a huge and stupid risk, as the seller can sell it to someone else who when they do record will generally defeat my right to ownership, or if intervening judgment or tax liens get recorded before I record it, my property will be subject to the prior seller’s liabilities. By not recording the grant deed, I am not “violating the law”, but I am responsible for the legal consequences of my decision not to record it. Those legal consequences depend on the circumstances that create an issue because of my non-recordation of my interest.

With MERS mortgages which are recorded, where MERS is this “nominee” for some other beneficial holder who is relying on MERS’ electronic system of transfers in lieu of recording an actual assignment of the mortgage, I don’t think the issue is illegality so much as it is the potential legal problems with not having the assignment of record. Clearly, this is the lesson on MERS mortgages demonstrated by the Kansas Supreme Court in Landmark National Bank v. Kesler in which it was held that MERS as nominee for a junior mortgage was not entitled to notice of a senior lien’s foreclosure under the Kansas system, since the true owner of the mortgage had not recorded its assignment.

So I agree that the concept of trying to create a private system of assignments just to save on recording fees and servicing costs is a failed experiment and not a system worth defending. I would think that any counsel for a lender holding an unrecorded assignment with MERS as nominee would be advising to get it out of the MERS system and have the assignment recorded pronto. Who wants to be a MERS guinea pig at this point?

But all this internet hysteria about MERS mortgages being invalidated on a mass scale, recording statutes being the equivalent of consumer protection statutes, the lack of recordation being a massive fraud, and the poor recorders not getting fees for assignments they did not record, results in a lot of internet hits for the sites that try to one up each other on the sensationalism, but for the most part is a bunch of hogwash.

[Kingside]

No, obviously MERS mortgages have their legal problems, what I mean is what the DC attorney general is doing is pure politics. And now it appears to be accepted as fact on the internet.

But to me, all this hoopla about MERS “violating the law” because the true assignee of the mortgage is hidden, ergo, there is some sort of fraud or violation of recording statutes really misses the point.

I can buy a property from you, and get delivery of a grant deed. Once I do that, I own the property whether I choose to record it or not. If I choose not to record the grant deed, I am taking a huge and stupid risk, as the seller can sell it to someone else who when they do record will generally defeat my right to ownership, or if intervening judgment or tax liens get recorded before I record it, my property will be subject to the prior seller’s liabilities. By not recording the grant deed, I am not “violating the law”, but I am responsible for the legal consequences of my decision not to record it. Those legal consequences depend on the circumstances that create an issue because of my non-recordation of my interest.

With MERS mortgages which are recorded, where MERS is this “nominee” for some other beneficial holder who is relying on MERS’ electronic system of transfers in lieu of recording an actual assignment of the mortgage, I don’t think the issue is illegality so much as it is the potential legal problems with not having the assignment of record. Clearly, this is the lesson on MERS mortgages demonstrated by the Kansas Supreme Court in Landmark National Bank v. Kesler in which it was held that MERS as nominee for a junior mortgage was not entitled to notice of a senior lien’s foreclosure under the Kansas system, since the true owner of the mortgage had not recorded its assignment.

So I agree that the concept of trying to create a private system of assignments just to save on recording fees and servicing costs is a failed experiment and not a system worth defending. I would think that any counsel for a lender holding an unrecorded assignment with MERS as nominee would be advising to get it out of the MERS system and have the assignment recorded pronto. Who wants to be a MERS guinea pig at this point?

But all this internet hysteria about MERS mortgages being invalidated on a mass scale, recording statutes being the equivalent of consumer protection statutes, the lack of recordation being a massive fraud, and the poor recorders not getting fees for assignments they did not record, results in a lot of internet hits for the sites that try to one up each other on the sensationalism, but for the most part is a bunch of hogwash.

[Kingside]

No, obviously MERS mortgages have their legal problems, what I mean is what the DC attorney general is doing is pure politics. And now it appears to be accepted as fact on the internet.

But to me, all this hoopla about MERS “violating the law” because the true assignee of the mortgage is hidden, ergo, there is some sort of fraud or violation of recording statutes really misses the point.

I can buy a property from you, and get delivery of a grant deed. Once I do that, I own the property whether I choose to record it or not. If I choose not to record the grant deed, I am taking a huge and stupid risk, as the seller can sell it to someone else who when they do record will generally defeat my right to ownership, or if intervening judgment or tax liens get recorded before I record it, my property will be subject to the prior seller’s liabilities. By not recording the grant deed, I am not “violating the law”, but I am responsible for the legal consequences of my decision not to record it. Those legal consequences depend on the circumstances that create an issue because of my non-recordation of my interest.

With MERS mortgages which are recorded, where MERS is this “nominee” for some other beneficial holder who is relying on MERS’ electronic system of transfers in lieu of recording an actual assignment of the mortgage, I don’t think the issue is illegality so much as it is the potential legal problems with not having the assignment of record. Clearly, this is the lesson on MERS mortgages demonstrated by the Kansas Supreme Court in Landmark National Bank v. Kesler in which it was held that MERS as nominee for a junior mortgage was not entitled to notice of a senior lien’s foreclosure under the Kansas system, since the true owner of the mortgage had not recorded its assignment.

So I agree that the concept of trying to create a private system of assignments just to save on recording fees and servicing costs is a failed experiment and not a system worth defending. I would think that any counsel for a lender holding an unrecorded assignment with MERS as nominee would be advising to get it out of the MERS system and have the assignment recorded pronto. Who wants to be a MERS guinea pig at this point?

But all this internet hysteria about MERS mortgages being invalidated on a mass scale, recording statutes being the equivalent of consumer protection statutes, the lack of recordation being a massive fraud, and the poor recorders not getting fees for assignments they did not record, results in a lot of internet hits for the sites that try to one up each other on the sensationalism, but for the most part is a bunch of hogwash.

[Kingside]

No, obviously MERS mortgages have their legal problems, what I mean is what the DC attorney general is doing is pure politics. And now it appears to be accepted as fact on the internet.

But to me, all this hoopla about MERS “violating the law” because the true assignee of the mortgage is hidden, ergo, there is some sort of fraud or violation of recording statutes really misses the point.

I can buy a property from you, and get delivery of a grant deed. Once I do that, I own the property whether I choose to record it or not. If I choose not to record the grant deed, I am taking a huge and stupid risk, as the seller can sell it to someone else who when they do record will generally defeat my right to ownership, or if intervening judgment or tax liens get recorded before I record it, my property will be subject to the prior seller’s liabilities. By not recording the grant deed, I am not “violating the law”, but I am responsible for the legal consequences of my decision not to record it. Those legal consequences depend on the circumstances that create an issue because of my non-recordation of my interest.

With MERS mortgages which are recorded, where MERS is this “nominee” for some other beneficial holder who is relying on MERS’ electronic system of transfers in lieu of recording an actual assignment of the mortgage, I don’t think the issue is illegality so much as it is the potential legal problems with not having the assignment of record. Clearly, this is the lesson on MERS mortgages demonstrated by the Kansas Supreme Court in Landmark National Bank v. Kesler in which it was held that MERS as nominee for a junior mortgage was not entitled to notice of a senior lien’s foreclosure under the Kansas system, since the true owner of the mortgage had not recorded its assignment.

So I agree that the concept of trying to create a private system of assignments just to save on recording fees and servicing costs is a failed experiment and not a system worth defending. I would think that any counsel for a lender holding an unrecorded assignment with MERS as nominee would be advising to get it out of the MERS system and have the assignment recorded pronto. Who wants to be a MERS guinea pig at this point?

But all this internet hysteria about MERS mortgages being invalidated on a mass scale, recording statutes being the equivalent of consumer protection statutes, the lack of recordation being a massive fraud, and the poor recorders not getting fees for assignments they did not record, results in a lot of internet hits for the sites that try to one up each other on the sensationalism, but for the most part is a bunch of hogwash.

[Kingside]

This strikes me as pure politics. If an attorney general thinks there is a violation of law, they should start an enforcement action, not issue the equivalent of a press release inviting consumers in foreclosure to contact them.

When an ag states what the law is with out referring to the statute at issue, skepticism is appropriate.

In general, county recorders and recording systems are there for folks who want to protect their interests by recording documents such as assignments so that their interests are perfected against consenting owners or subsequent parties who may have a claim against the chain of title. Someone who does not record their interest takes a risk as to these third parties by not doing so. But that is the party’s risk, it is not some sort of governmental entitlement. The county recorder should not care less whether someone is protecting their rights by recording or not recording an assignment. The notion that a county recorder can transmogrify the failure to record an assignment into some kind of “right” to fees for not doing so is kind of bizarre IMHO.

[Kingside]

This strikes me as pure politics. If an attorney general thinks there is a violation of law, they should start an enforcement action, not issue the equivalent of a press release inviting consumers in foreclosure to contact them.

When an ag states what the law is with out referring to the statute at issue, skepticism is appropriate.

In general, county recorders and recording systems are there for folks who want to protect their interests by recording documents such as assignments so that their interests are perfected against consenting owners or subsequent parties who may have a claim against the chain of title. Someone who does not record their interest takes a risk as to these third parties by not doing so. But that is the party’s risk, it is not some sort of governmental entitlement. The county recorder should not care less whether someone is protecting their rights by recording or not recording an assignment. The notion that a county recorder can transmogrify the failure to record an assignment into some kind of “right” to fees for not doing so is kind of bizarre IMHO.

[Kingside]

This strikes me as pure politics. If an attorney general thinks there is a violation of law, they should start an enforcement action, not issue the equivalent of a press release inviting consumers in foreclosure to contact them.

When an ag states what the law is with out referring to the statute at issue, skepticism is appropriate.

In general, county recorders and recording systems are there for folks who want to protect their interests by recording documents such as assignments so that their interests are perfected against consenting owners or subsequent parties who may have a claim against the chain of title. Someone who does not record their interest takes a risk as to these third parties by not doing so. But that is the party’s risk, it is not some sort of governmental entitlement. The county recorder should not care less whether someone is protecting their rights by recording or not recording an assignment. The notion that a county recorder can transmogrify the failure to record an assignment into some kind of “right” to fees for not doing so is kind of bizarre IMHO.

[Kingside]

This strikes me as pure politics. If an attorney general thinks there is a violation of law, they should start an enforcement action, not issue the equivalent of a press release inviting consumers in foreclosure to contact them.

When an ag states what the law is with out referring to the statute at issue, skepticism is appropriate.

In general, county recorders and recording systems are there for folks who want to protect their interests by recording documents such as assignments so that their interests are perfected against consenting owners or subsequent parties who may have a claim against the chain of title. Someone who does not record their interest takes a risk as to these third parties by not doing so. But that is the party’s risk, it is not some sort of governmental entitlement. The county recorder should not care less whether someone is protecting their rights by recording or not recording an assignment. The notion that a county recorder can transmogrify the failure to record an assignment into some kind of “right” to fees for not doing so is kind of bizarre IMHO.

[Kingside]

This strikes me as pure politics. If an attorney general thinks there is a violation of law, they should start an enforcement action, not issue the equivalent of a press release inviting consumers in foreclosure to contact them.

When an ag states what the law is with out referring to the statute at issue, skepticism is appropriate.

In general, county recorders and recording systems are there for folks who want to protect their interests by recording documents such as assignments so that their interests are perfected against consenting owners or subsequent parties who may have a claim against the chain of title. Someone who does not record their interest takes a risk as to these third parties by not doing so. But that is the party’s risk, it is not some sort of governmental entitlement. The county recorder should not care less whether someone is protecting their rights by recording or not recording an assignment. The notion that a county recorder can transmogrify the failure to record an assignment into some kind of “right” to fees for not doing so is kind of bizarre IMHO.

[Kingside]

If you eat out a lot, the CITI forward card gives you 5 “thank you” points per dollar for restaurants. As long as you don’t buy the overpriced stuff the program tries to get you to use points for, and instead get gift cards in $100 increments, that equates to 5% back on restaurant spending.

If you have AT&T bills the Citi AT&T card also gives you 5 thank you points per dollar spent, and thank you points accumulate into one account from different citi cards.

It is hard to keep up with the constant changes in card reward programs, but it is a sad state of affairs that the return on credit card reward program spending exceeds the rate of return you get on savings accounts.

[Kingside]

If you eat out a lot, the CITI forward card gives you 5 “thank you” points per dollar for restaurants. As long as you don’t buy the overpriced stuff the program tries to get you to use points for, and instead get gift cards in $100 increments, that equates to 5% back on restaurant spending.

If you have AT&T bills the Citi AT&T card also gives you 5 thank you points per dollar spent, and thank you points accumulate into one account from different citi cards.

It is hard to keep up with the constant changes in card reward programs, but it is a sad state of affairs that the return on credit card reward program spending exceeds the rate of return you get on savings accounts.

[Kingside]

If you eat out a lot, the CITI forward card gives you 5 “thank you” points per dollar for restaurants. As long as you don’t buy the overpriced stuff the program tries to get you to use points for, and instead get gift cards in $100 increments, that equates to 5% back on restaurant spending.

If you have AT&T bills the Citi AT&T card also gives you 5 thank you points per dollar spent, and thank you points accumulate into one account from different citi cards.

It is hard to keep up with the constant changes in card reward programs, but it is a sad state of affairs that the return on credit card reward program spending exceeds the rate of return you get on savings accounts.

[Kingside]

If you eat out a lot, the CITI forward card gives you 5 “thank you” points per dollar for restaurants. As long as you don’t buy the overpriced stuff the program tries to get you to use points for, and instead get gift cards in $100 increments, that equates to 5% back on restaurant spending.

If you have AT&T bills the Citi AT&T card also gives you 5 thank you points per dollar spent, and thank you points accumulate into one account from different citi cards.

It is hard to keep up with the constant changes in card reward programs, but it is a sad state of affairs that the return on credit card reward program spending exceeds the rate of return you get on savings accounts.

[Kingside]

If you eat out a lot, the CITI forward card gives you 5 “thank you” points per dollar for restaurants. As long as you don’t buy the overpriced stuff the program tries to get you to use points for, and instead get gift cards in $100 increments, that equates to 5% back on restaurant spending.

If you have AT&T bills the Citi AT&T card also gives you 5 thank you points per dollar spent, and thank you points accumulate into one account from different citi cards.

It is hard to keep up with the constant changes in card reward programs, but it is a sad state of affairs that the return on credit card reward program spending exceeds the rate of return you get on savings accounts.

[Kingside]

When Chase first took over WAMU, they offered me $100 to open a free business checking account. I took it.

The way I see it, I got my share of TARP funds.

[Author]

Posts