To better comprehend this, you will need to learn about your Local, State and Federal Laws. Start with the Laws of your State and Local Governments. There are plenty of rabbit holes to go down there alone. Remember Alice in Wonderland?
YOU MUST UNDERSTAND, NONE OF THIS IS A SUBSTITUTE FOR LEGAL ADVICE.THIS, my friends, is EDUCATION!Here goes;
1. I/We (“Borrowers”) NEGOTIATED a loan with (Lender”)“American Mortgage Network (“AMNET”).
2. In that NEGOTIATION, I/We SIGNED a NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT with AMNET.
3. As COLLATERAL, (“Borrowers”)I/We SIGNED a SECURITY INSTRUMENT that rendered certain performances in the contract.
The NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT: (AKA “NOTE”)1. The NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT listed the two PARTIES INVOLVED as; (1)AMERICAN MORTGAGE NETWORK (“Lender”) and (2)Alvie and Julie Campbell as (“Borrowers”).
2. In that NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, I/we (“borrower”) PROMISE to pay to AMERICAN MORTGAGE NETWORK (“Lender”) a sum of money in return for a loan I/we SECURED with a SECURITY INSTRUMENT.
3. This NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT sets out the terms of the NEGOTIATION: the amount of the debt, the mortgage due date, the rate of interest, the amount of monthly payments, whether the lender requires monthly payments to build a tax and insurance reserve, whether the loan may be repaid with larger or more frequent payments without a prepayment penalty, and whether failing to make a payment or selling the property will entitle the lender to call the entire debt due.
4. This document is ONLY the NEGOTIATION for something of value. This being monetary.
The SECURITY INSTRUMENT: (AKA “DEED OF TRUST”)1. In the SECURITY INSTRUMENT and upon default, (Borrower”)Alvie/Julie Campbell transfers (“conveys”) an interest in a TITLE to REAL PROPERTY to a certain TRUSTEE as a SECURITY.
2. In essence, (“Borrower”) Alvie/Julie Campbell are bound by this SECURITY INSTRUMENT until (“Borrower”I/We repay the amount (“Borrower”)I/We NEGOTIATED with (“Lender”) AMERICAN MORTGAGE NETWORK in the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.
3. The three PARTIES involved in the SECURITY INSTRUMENT are the (“Grantor”), Alvie/Julie Campbell (1), the (“Trustee”) George whatever his name(2), and the (“Lender”), AMERICAN MORTGAGE NETWORK(3), and then there is an intrusive non-party,( a third party, you might say) the (“Beneficiary/Nominee”), Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems (MERS) who has no beneficial Ownership Right’s in either the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT
or the SECURITY INSTRUMENT.
4. This (“SECURITY INSTRUMENT”) CONTRACT is between THREE PARTIES. GRANTOR, TRUSTEE and the LENDER
5. This SECURITY INSTRUMENT EVIDENCES the “original” amount as NEGOTIATED in the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.
6. This SECURITY INSTRUMENT also identifies where the REAL PROPERTY is located that is being used as COLLATERAL.
7. This SECURITY INSTRUMENT provides the provisions, requirements and legal procedures.
8. This SECURITY INSTRUMENT provides the POWER OF SALE clause.
9. This SECURITY INSTRUMENT provides the GOVERNING LAWS.
Rule of thumb;
Two “O’s” = Borrower (Obligor, Trustor, Mortgagor, etc.)
Two “E’s” = Lender (Obligee, Mortgagee, Trustee, etc.)
BUSINESS & COMMERCE CODE
CHAPTER 3. NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
SUBCHAPTER A. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS
§ 3.103. DEFINITIONS.
(12) "Promise" means a written undertaking to pay money signed by the person
undertaking to pay. An acknowledgment of an obligation by the obligor is not
a promise unless the obligor also undertakes to pay the obligation.
WHAT TOOK PLACE(ON OR ABOUT OCTOBER, 2004)
The “Borrower(s)” entered into NEGOTIATION with the “Lender”. I/We (“Borrower’s”), by executing a NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT and this NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT at the beginning of the “Borrowers” NEGOTIATION was to be a SECURED DEBT by the execution of the SECURITY INSTRUMENT and the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT together.
The NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT and the SECURITY INSTRUMENT combined create a SECURED DEBT. These two “INSTRUMENTS” are inseparable without consequences.
At this point, the “Lender”, AMNET is the HOLDER IN DUE COURSE (HIDC)(§ 3.302. HOLDER IN DUE COURSE)
Sometime in December, 2004, some “other” entity comes along and provides me with a new account number and says they are taking over. We assume this is ok. We make payments to them. These people call themselves the MORTGAGE SERVICER.
They are not the “PARTY” to the “instrument” which I NEGOTIATED. Tex Bus and Com Code Article III, (§ 3.302. HOLDER IN DUE COURSE;(10)"Party" means a party to an instrument.)
PROPERTY CODE - TITLE 5. EXEMPT PROPERTY AND LIENS -SUBTITLE B. LIENS
CHAPTER 51. PROVISIONS GENERALLY APPLICABLE TO LIENS
(3) "Mortgage servicer" means the last person to whom a mortgagor has been instructed by the current mortgagee to send payments for the debt secured by a security instrument. A mortgagee may be the mortgage servicer.
At this point, (“Borrower’s”)I/We do not know whether the Debt is SECURED or UNSECURED. Very important.
BIFURCATION IN THE MAKING
(ON OR ABOUT SEPTEMBER, 2008)
PUBLIC RECORDS: https://deed.wilco.org/RealEstate/SearchEntry.aspx
PUBLIC RECORDS in Williamson County, Texas, reveal that document #2008075222, a “Notice of Assignment of Note and DEED of TRUST” was recorded on September 30, 2008 which memorialized a TRANSER/ASSIGNMENT of a SECURITY INSTRUMENT from Mortgage Electronic Registrations Systems (MERS) to Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. These “Parties” were not the “ORIGINAL PARTIES INVOLVED” and have provided no proof to show they had any rights to make the Transfer/Assignment.
According to TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 192.007, they don’t. They have not proved it.
This FILING and RECORDING in PUBLIC RECORDS IS FRAUD ON PUBLIC RECORDS. The “ASSIGNOR”, MERS, was not the Owner/Holder or Holder in Due Course (HIDC) of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT. The SECURED DEBT is the COMBINATION of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT which is secured by the SECURITY INSTRUMENT. The NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT DOES NOT IDENTIFY MERS as one of the PARTIES INVOLVED. MERS has NO LEGAL AUTHORITY to record this into PUBLIC RECORD unless MERS has perfected the proper negotiation of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT to achieve such rights as Owner/Holder of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT.
According to document number #2008075222, recorded in Williamson County public records, MERS, without having a beneficial ownership rights in the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, Assigned the SECURITY to a 3rd party.
MERS “ASSIGNMENT of NOTE and DEED of Trust” offers to you, the PUBLIC, the PROOF required to show Bifurcation of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT from the SECURITY INSTRUMENT and has created a NULLITY of the SECURITY INSTRUMENT. MERS has now converted the SECURED DEBT into A NON-SECURED DEBT. This renders the POWER OF
SALE clause contained within the SECURITY INSTRUMENT out of reach of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT as such SECURITY INSTRUMENT a NULLITY. Through this attempt of “ASSIGNMENT” of the SECURED DEBT, MERS has DESTROYED the SECURED DEBT by BIFURCATION.
Although MERS or Wells Fargo may claim recordation of the “ASSIGNMENTS” which reflects the negotiation of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT, are not a required action in regards to the
Texas Business and Commerce Code and the Texas Property Code, both MERS and Wells Fargo have failed to review the “SECURITY INSTRUMENT”, Section 14. (Governing Laws; Severability),” This SECURITY INSTRUMENT shall be governed by Federal law and the law of the jurisdiction in which the property is located”.
The FILING of the “DEED of TRUST” was a willful voluntary act executed that was required by 3rd party contract, Title Companies, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac as examples. The Texas Property Codes states that they “MAY” and so they did.
Both MERS and Wells Fargo FAILED to follow TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE 192.007;
§ 192.007. RECORDS OF RELEASES AND OTHER ACTIONS. (a) To release, transfer, assign, or
take another action relating to an instrument that is filed, registered, or recorded in the office of the county clerk, a person must file, register, or record another instrument relating to the action in the same manner as the original instrument was required to be filed, registered, or recorded.
(b) An entry, including a marginal entry, may not be made on a previously made record or index to indicate the new action.
Added by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1248, § 53, eff. Sept. 1, 1989.
MERs, nor WELLS FARGO have any legal authority to FORECLOSE on “Borrower’s” REAL PROPERTY due to the SEPERATION or BIFURCATION of the NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT and the SECURITY INSTRUMENT.
“Borrower’s” do not deny that they owe the DEBT.
However, the rightful owner of the NON-SECURED debt is not present and even if they may attempt to produce a JUDGMENT upon ALLEGED DEBTOR by initiating legal collections against the “UNSECURED NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENT”. They might be able to achieve a money Judgment but they cannot FORECLOSE ON THE HOME.
Now you know what Bifurcation is.
Hope its helpful.
