.jpg)
EXAMPLES OF HIJACKING FOR SATURDAYTo:
Mr. Coe:
In your case was the QCD actually recorded? Did you check the instrument
number on the QCD and actually go and pull the instrument number from title
to make sure that in fact that was the same document? There is very good
chance that it wasn't actually recorded. What they do is everyday they
collect recording stamps off the records filed. So whenever they need a
date stamp to cut and paste on to a QCD to stop a sale, they just draw from
the inventory of stamps. From these same documents, they pull off the
notary stamp and signature. I have interviewed six different notaries who
have all claimed they did not notarize a grant deed. The one that I
believe is the one that was working for the State Franchise Tax Board who
notarized tax liens. She didn't EVER notarize anything BUT tax liens. I
buy that. Yet the QCD had her signature & Stamp notarizing my client's
signature on the QCD. You can see they just did a cut and paste job.
You can go to NETRONLINE.COM for five bucks, if you have the instrument
number of a document you want you can get it from them online. Its great
because most of us have title history search ability through our friendly
title rep. So you can get the instrument numbers from there. Then you go
to NetROnline and pull the actual documents. I did this a few times only
to discover that the document was never the QCD actually recorded.
Let us know what you find out?
Renay
On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Jaenam Coe wrote:
> **
>
>
> In my client's case, I filed an indiv. ch 7 to learn afterwards that a
> stranger had filed a QCD of his house to my client a day before the bk. My
> client's bk stopped the stranger's home foreclosure. I am still beating my
> head to figure out how the clairvoyant crook knew that I was going to file
> bk the next day. (My guess is that somehow there is a lag time between
> recording and express mail service at the county recorder's office so the
> crooks actually recorded the predated QCD after seeing the bk filing)
> I sent a letter to OUST with exhibits, but the OUTS advised me that their
> policy is not to inform the outcome of their investigation. So I am still
> in the fog as to what had really happened. Jae Coe
>
>
>
> --- On *Wed, 1/18/12, Mark T. Jessee * wrote:
>
>
> Subject: Re: [cdcbaa] Re: EXAMPLES OF HIJACKING FOR SATURDAY
> To: cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wednesday, January 18, 2012, 12:11 PM
>
>
> I agree that the homeowners probably did not sign any deed conveying title
> to a bankruptcy debtor. The people they hired to help them stave off
> foreclosure are the crooks who forged documents and/or signatures. My
> point is the homeowners know who they hired. Question the homeonwers
> and the information provided leads to the perpatrators of these bk
> hijackings.
>
>
>
> Compiling evidence to present to law enforcement is of course a smart idea.
>
>
> Mark T. Jessee
> Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
> "A Debt Relief Agency"
> 50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
> Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
> (805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
>
>
>
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:54:25 -0000, jbsesq1965
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Mark:
>
> In my cases, there is no forgery, per se. The grant deed is pulled off of
> the county records and is "real" but the body has been altered to change
> the name of the grantee, grantor, the legal description, the names that
> appear under the signature line and the APN. In my cases, they used the
> SAME deed as a template. I'm looking at three recorded documents, one real,
> from the recorder's office, and having nothing to do with my client or the
> case, and two, bearing the SAME recorder's document number, same signatures
> (largely illegible) but purporting to transfer different property from
> different people to my client, two months before she filed BK. I don't
> think the owners signed ANYTHING in my case, as the signatures are
> unaltered fromm the original real deed.
>
> Yes they likely hired someone to stop the sale, but the perpetrators were
> able to do this without having the owners sign anything. That's why I want
> to compare notes with others. I'm wondering if this is the only way its
> being done or if there are other ways this is being accomplished. It will
> help us help the authorities figure out if we are dealing with a few people
> or not.
>
> I love Judge Tighe's approach, but isn't that the job of law enforcement?
>
> Jeff
>
> --- In cdcbaa@yahoogroups.com ,
> "Mark T. Jessee" wrote:
> >
> > While I have only had a couple of bankruptcy hijacking instances in my
> > client's cases, I would think that the property owners facing
> > foreclosure hired someone to help stop a foreclosure. While the
> > property owners may have no knowledge of the fake deeds and bankruptcy
> > hijacking, they do know who they hired to help them. If this is
> > becoming a common scheme I would hope that OUST would work with law
> > enforcement to investigate and track down the perpetrators. I would
> > think any investigator would start by questioning the property onwers
> > whose signatures were forged on the fake deeds to see who they hired
> > and pursue the leads from there. The problem is having law enforcement
> > seeing it as a big enough issue to investigate.
> >
> > Mark T. Jessee
> > Law Offices of Mark T. Jessee
> > "A Debt Relief Agency"
> > 50 W. Hillcrest Drive, Suite 200
> > Thousand Oaks, CA 91360
> > (805) 497-5868 (805) 497-5864 (Facsimile)
> >
> > On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:04:23 -0000, jbsesq1965 wrote:
> >
> > Group:
> >
> > On the subject of Hijacking. I am seeing some similarities in the bogus
> > grant deeds that are the crux of the "hijacking" cases that have
> > occurred in my office. It leads me to believe that the perpetrator(s)
> > are possibly a small group of people. Someone out there who is offering
> > to stall foreclosures for a fee, and using this method.
> >
> > I'm going to bring examples of the bogus transfer deeds from my
> > hijacked files to the meeting Saturday. I would like it if some of you
> > would bring examples from your files of deeds purporting to transfer
> > property to your client(s) that are bogus. I would like to invite
> > anyone interested to meet with me after the program at 1:15p.m. or so
> > to compare the offending deeds for a few minutes of collective forensic
> > detective work.
> >
> > We may be able to determine, I think, whether there are just a few
> > people out there doing this hijacking, or if its more widespread, by
> > comparing the evidence that is showing up in our cases. We may also be
> > able to come up with some method of assisting the OUST or FBI in back
> > tracking these things to their sources, so someone can start putting an
> > end to it.
> >
> > I'm bringing the real deed as it appears in the County Recorder's
> > records, (available from any title officer) as well as the bogus deed
> > that was provided to the forclosure company/lender to stop the sale
> > that ended up in the MFR. I encourage you who have had this experience
> > to do the same, and make an extra 30 minutes to meet Saturday.
> >
> > Jeff Smith
> >
>
>
>
R. Grace Rodriguez, Esq.
OFF: (818) 734-7223
CEL: (818) 554-9922
NO EX-PARTE NOTICE VIA VOICE MAIL OR EMAIL: I do not accept e-mail notice
for ex parte Applications via voicemail or by email. You must comply with
California Law and give notice to a person in my office during regular
business hours.
CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This message contains privileged and
confidential information and is intended only for the individual named. If
you are not the intended recipient you should not disseminate, distribute,
store, print, copy or deliver this message. Please notify the sender
immediately by e-mail if you have received this e-mail by mistake and
delete this e-mail from your system.
Mr. Coe:In your case was the QCD actually recorded? Did you check the instrument number on the QCD and actually go and pull the instrument number from title to make sure that in fact that was the same document? There is very good chance that it wasn't actually recorded. What they do is everyday they collect recording stamps off the records filed. So whenever they need a date stamp to cut and paste on to a QCD to stop a sale, they just draw from the inventory of stamps. From these same documents, they pull off the notary stamp and signature. I have interviewed six different notaries who have all claimed they did not notarize a grant deed. The one that I believe is the one that was working for the State Franchise Tax Board who notarized tax liens. She didn't EVER notarize anything BUT tax liens. I buy that. Yet the QCD had her signature & Stamp notarizing my client's signature on the QCD. You can see they just did a cut and paste job.
You can go to NETRONLINE.COM for five bucks, if you have the instrument number of a document you want you can get it from them online. Its great because most of us have title history search ability through our friendly title rep. So you can get the instrument numbers from there. Then you go to NetROnline and pull the actual documents. I did this a few times only to discover that the document was never the QCD actually recorded.
Let us know what you find out?RenayOn Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 3:09 PM, Jaenam Coe <jaenamcoe@yahoo.com> wrote:
In my client's case, I filed an indiv. ch 7 to learn afterwards that a stranger had filed a QCD of his house to my client a day before the bk. My client's bk stopped the stranger's home foreclosure. I am still beating my head to figure out how the clairvoyant crook knew that I was going to file bk the next day. (My guess is that somehow there is a lag time between recording and express mail service at the county recorder's office so the crooks actually recorded the predated QCD after seeing the bk filing)
I sent a letter to OUST with exhibits, but the OUTS advised me that their policy is not to inform the outcome of their investigation. So I am still in the fog as to what had really happened. Jae Coe
seelaw.com" target"_blank">mjessee@jesseelaw.com> wrote:
The post was migrated from Yahoo.