As you recalled, Wachovia’s attorney responded a couple of days ago.
Today, I am firing off back to the attorneys with a motion to compel them to stipulate under penalty of perjury whether or not they are representing the holder in due course and a real party of interest.
You see, an attorney typically represents a client on hearsay. He would go into court spouting this and that, going on faith that his client is who he says he is. It is up to you to object to whatever he says on the basis of hearsay. If you don’t object, it is admitted.
With this motion, what I am trying to do is honestly to save the court time and money. I am compelling the attorney to submit an affidavit that they have first hand knowledge that the Defendant is in fact the Holder in Due Course and a Real Party of Interest.
In other words, this is the basis for my civil action anyway. I am now having the attorney prove my point for me. If he won’t/can’t, then anything he says moving forward is hearsay….and is objected to.
It would be interesting to see if the judge would grant this motion. If the Judge denies, he must state the reason for the denial.
Anyway, I have faxed the motion to the attorney. I am heading to court to file the paperwork.
Sincerely
George
Ps. This document is in my coaching kit (005i-motion to compel-Attorneys Nightmare.doc)
about 1 year ago
Besides, you don’t have firsthand knowledge that Wachovia no longer is “Holder in Due Course and a Real Party of Interest”, so using your reasoning, doesn’t that make anything you say in court hearsay and inadmissable?
about 1 year ago
George, this is ridiculous. Please go look up hearsay. Here, Wikipedia may help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hearsay_in_United_States_law
“… the Federal Rules of Evidence, … generally defines hearsay as a “statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted.”
George, why would anybody expect that an attorney must have first-hand knowledge of the matter at hand in order to represent his client? Criminal defense attorneys never have firsthand knowledge that their client is innocent, nor do criminal prosecutors ever have firsthand knowledge that the defendant is guilty, because neither were at the scene of the crime at the time of the crime.
Even if Wachovia’s attorney admits that he does not have firsthand knowledge that Wachovia is the holder, that will not make “anything he says moving forward … hearsay”. Hearsay pertains to statements in court about statements made outside of court, which if they are hearsay, would have been so regardless of your motion.
Your motion is frivolous, and I hope you get sanctioned for it.
about 1 year ago
I did read that in your book and understand. In your coaching program, some of your documents are still referring to the APA act. Since the APA of 1946 has no relevance, why do we still fire off the letters to the banks/servicer’s citing this.
Why not start from filing a civil suit. (what is the purpose and relevance of Modules 1-6) My thoughts on this is that you are trying to create a paper trail of communication, but that paper trail is not back by law or any process.
So technically, this procedure and the coaching program shows a pro se how to file a civil action against the bank/servicer for lack of standing? If so, I have not seen one case in any state where the banks do not come back and fight you hard.
I may have just signed up for something I already know how to do: write pleadings.
Did I?
about 1 year ago
The Federal Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946 is a remedial statute designed to ensure uniformity and openness in the procedures used by federal agencies. The Act is comprised of a comprehensive regulatory scheme governing regulations, adjudications, and rule making in general terms. The Act basically governs the following activities of federal agencies (unless later statutes provide otherwise): (1) Rulemaking, (2) Adjudication, (3) Judicial review of agency action, (4) Access to agency information (Freedom of Information Act [FOIA] amendment), and (5) Open meetings (Government in the Sunshine Act amendment). The Federal APA is the major source for federal administrative agency law, while state agencies’ administration and regulation are governed by comparable state acts.
“Used by Federal Agencies” I do not see any requirement for banks or servicers to respond to any of our notices or requests based upon this. Am I missing something?
about 1 year ago
George,
The Administrative Procedures Act of 1946 looks to be for government agencies and not geared towards two private parties:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administrative_Procedure_Act
Do you think that the opposing side is going to discredit the APA as lacking relevance?
Or that the reason that they did not respond previously was because they were not properly served. Now, that they were served, they are going to come with the demurrers and try to defeat you at the pleading stage.
Is there any case law or citations that can be referenced in the APA that a judge or even the opposing attorney can look at and see the relevance of it between a homeowner and a bank/servicer?
Right now, I think their attorney is going to come with the demurrer’s and motion to dismiss.