Arizona state Rep prevents vote from happening on banking bill that already passed 28-2 in senate

A simple bill stating that owners must prove ownership to foreclose which had passed 28-2 in the Arizona senate was not even allowed to be put up for vote in the house. Rep McClain chair of the banking and insurance committee states in this video I was not willing to hear the bill as it was passed in the senate.

So what do they do - they strike the bill - meaning they replaced all the language of the bill with completely new language about fire districts!!

With that one statement she has acted like a dictator and robbed the citizens of Arizona of a vote on law whose passage was all but guaranteed. If this does not bring it home for you just how phoney our representative republic has become I'm not sure what will.

Watch this video - which has video of the Rep in it.


The fact that this is a law that even needs to be passed shows what a sorry state this country is in. I mean come on we need a law that says you have to prove ownership to take back property that can be worth 100's of thousands if not millions of dollars? Really?

YES we do need this law - because the banks CANNOT prove ownership which is precisely the reason this rep blocked it.

Anyway the Market ticker has two good articles about how this bill came to be - a state rep got sued for daring to ask if the bank could prove ownership here
and here with more info on this slug Rep.

who ever holds the deed owns the house and that is the proof of ownership

just like whoever owns the title to your car owns the vehicle

that is up until the loan or mortgage is paid off.

while people normally think that own their homes they have the legal right to live their up to the point that their loan is paid off and then they legally own the property.

failure to pay the loan is a breech of a legal contract hence the foreclosure action.

thats the truth sorry

Originally posted by neo96
who ever holds the deed owns the house and that is the proof of ownership

just like whoever owns the title to your car owns the vehicle

that is up until the loan or mortgage is paid off.

while people normally think that own their homes they have the legal right to live their up to the point that their loan is paid off and then they legally own the property.

failure to pay the loan is a breech of a legal contract hence the foreclosure action.

thats the truth sorry

edit on 25-4-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

Only if the title was transferred properly - and with MERS which is what has been used almost exclusively for the last decade, they were NOT. This was intentional by the way for two reasons. First the banks did not want to pay the transfer fees to the states, and second they wanted ownership to be murky so they could assign the same property multiple times to multiple packages of loans.

If you do not know much about MERS you need to do research, it is an unbelievably criminal scam, and the bankers deserve to lose billions for ever using it.

The banks are paying off any politician or attorney general they can find to stop this from becomming public knowledge. The evidence is clear - they do not have the ability to prove ownership on a large percentage of the foreclosures they have filed for

reply to post by proximo


hmm and mers was founded by fanny and freddy which tells me everything i need to know here.

after a little further research mers is messed up but considering who founded them its no wonder

i can bet senators frank and dodd has some doing in this because no private company can do anything of that magnitude without a congressional nod.

Hey guys this thread is already up

www.abovetopsecret.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> Arizona senate passes bill to stop the banking fraud, one state rep nullifies the bill

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by proximo

 

hmm and mers was founded by fanny and freddy which tells me everything i need to know here.

after a little further research mers is messed up but considering who founded them its no wonder

i can bet senators frank and dodd has some doing in this because no private company can do anything of that magnitude without a congressional nod.

Indeed my friend a dark thing your politics heck ours too
Gave the Op a star and flag when I first read this. I'll give him another for the response and one for you as well.

I hope you guys keep this bumped a use it to get some action going. Get the reps email up and lets give her a bit of the old ATS love... the civilized way ;D

Just to be clear, there are two types of law where ownership of Real Estate is concerned depending on the state you live in. I live in Florida and we have a Lien Theory. I would imagine things will depend on which type of Real Estate law your state has.

What Is The Difference Between a Title Theory and a Lien Theory State?
Often a buyer wonders if he is buying property in a state which is considered a "title theory state" or a "lien theory" state. Why would you need to know which custom is practiced in your state?

When financing is involved in a real estate purchase, it is important to understand if you will be subject to the title or lien theory of mortgages. The way in which a state will interpret how mortgage law is followed will be determined by which type of theory is practiced in your state.

Each type of theory has special considerations on who will hold title and how foreclosure proceedings would take place if they were to become necessary. In title theory states, the borrower does not actually keep title to the property during the loan term. The seller gives the buyer/borrower a deed to the property but when the borrower signs the mortgage for the loan the borrower gives the title back to the mortgage holder. The lender then holds title to the property, as security only, until all loan payments have been made. During that time the borrower has the right to possession of the property, and the lender delivers the deed back to the borrower only after the loan obligation has been satisfied.

In a lien theory state, the buyer holds the deed to the property during the mortgage term The buyer promises to make all payments to the lender and the mortgage becomes a lien on the property, but title remains with the buyer. The lender's lien is removed once the payment of all loan payments have been completed. Foreclosure proceedings in a lien theory state may be more difficult for the lender than in a title theory state, due to the fact that the buyer is holding title to the land and not the lender.

Source www.escrowhelp.com...

ETA: I have the Deed to my property in Florida. If some lender is going to foreclose, then I would want to make sure they actually had ownership of the original mortgage. Or some other bank or if it was sold multiple times by a shady bank, then several times I could be foreclosed on and they claim I didn't honor the payments. Well show me the original papers and I will pay, otherwise the court should not award them my title to my property. It is the shady bankers or financial institutions that caused this nightmare and I should not lose my home because of their illegal and shady practices! That is why it matters!

If you live in a Title theory state, then some lender has the deed and should be able to produce it in court. If not, then who says they actually have the mortgage to the property. Since I live in Florida, I am not sure about how that would work in your state, but I would want some protection through state law so someone doesn't produce some faulty claim because they were sold a mortgage in securities that were sold multiple times. I think you as a buyer have a stronger case in a lien theory state than a title theory state. Just my jaded understanding.

reply to post by proximo


Rep.Nancy McLain should be charged with treason by the state of Arizona. If the citizens of Arizona are serious about this(they seem to be jumping up and down online over it) they should march en mass to their State capitol demanding her execution for treason.