standing fast for liberty. Gal. 5:1
For help and support, call us at (334) 239-8987 or click here to email us.

Words from the Rising Republics

Criminal at large right before your eyes

 

COMMENT: 90% OF ALL MORTGAGES IN AMERICA are GSE loans by Freddie Mac or Fannie Mae. This is an effort to allow banks to exceed the fractional banking limit of 9 times the bank’s deposits (Bank of America is on record for lending 52 times its deposits).

The GSE is not allowed to directly lend the money and wants everyone to believe it is the kind uncle who holds mortgages but will not foreclose. (See their instructions to all their servicers).

The originator bank gets a fee. The servicer gets a fee for pretending to be the lender and receiver of monthly payments. The servicer gets an even larger fee for foreclosing to make fraud appear legal.

GSE cannot bid in cash. The bid by a GSE can only be a credit bid, (no cash bid) acting in place of the servicing bank if no assignment is of record. 2002 instructions from the GSE to Originators and Servicers instructing them to digitize all documents including the assignment to the GSE and after scanning destroy all original instruments. One cannot be charged for altering an instrument that does not exists. (Title 18 §1512 is a maximum 20-year sentence, if convicted) The same that Roger Stone was charged with.

Most of the time the servicer unlawfully forecloses in its own name and coveys the property first to the GSE and the GSE sells the property for a fraction of its worth. The one percent’s ownership of Americas assets has risen from 9% in 2000 to 46% in 2018 thru use of this fraud.

The only answer as a safety net is a Quiet Title Action which has no statute of limitations. Only an honest judge can review the facts authenticated by the clerk, all without benefit of a jury that cannot alter the fact witness instruments, and in the judge’s chambers not for public hearing. Again, a dishonest judge risks being required to vacate his office and forfeit his “faithful performance” required bond. Most public servant do not post said bond, the keys to the American treasure are handed over to the criminals.

     Do not be deceived, the criminals will not go away voluntarily.

Eminent Domain Tribunal denied City of Ozark clear title

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell, pro per

4518 Woodledge Drive

Montgomery, AL 36109

THE CIRCUIT COURT OF DALE COUNTY, ALABAMA

 HAYWOOD JACKSON MIZELL, pro per,

                                                                                    )           Case No. CV-2013 000006.00

                                             Plaintiff,                         )          

vs.                                                                               )

WILLIAM G. BERRY, Attorney at law                   )         August 04, 2014

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.                                 )           Further Proceedings after Case

SIGLER DAVID,                                                      )           Remanded from Federal Court

STUMP JOHN G, INDIVIDUALLY C/O               )          

WELLS FARGO BANK et al                                   )                                                                                                                                                                            Defendants.                                                               )

 FURTHERANCE OF PROCEEDINGS

             COMES NOW, HAYWOOD JACKSON MIZELL, Plaintiffs pro per, seeking again a trial by jury, under common law, as a man on Alabama soil apart from any jurisdiction of any fiction law of a foreign domain, and for substantive relief from theft of property by defendants.

           The record of the proceedings in the MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA established many facts as unrebutted.

           The property at 285 East Broad Street, Ozark, Alabama remains without marketable title, a title that a reasonable buyer would accept because it appears to lack any defect and to cover the entire property that the seller has purported to sell; a title that enable a purchaser to hold property in peace during the period of ownership and to have it accepted by a later purchaser who employs the same standard of acceptability.

One definition of a marketable title which is been put forward repeatedly is one free from all reasonable doubt. Stated another way, a marketable title is one which does not contain any manner of defect or outstanding interest or claim which may conceivably operate to defeat or impair the interest which is bargained for and is intended to be conveyed. This negative concept of marketability has become an implied invitation for courts to declare the titles on the marketable if an examiner has entertained any doubt whatever with respect to them. The digest attest the painful truth that claims of a bygone era playing like barnacles to land tyros encumber them long after they should have been scrapped clean.... We need to replace this negative approach by a positive one which will make it marketability of tyros dependent solely upon their state you in some recent interval of time rather than upon their entire history. And quotation Paul E. Banshee BAS why he clearing land tyros section 371, at 539 (1953).

 

           The defendants procured a signature on a document labeled mortgage and loan which was to be used as purchase money, never disclosing that it was, in reality, a “power of attorney” for the sale of the Homestead. Fictitious acts under customs and usages by merchants allows that a document does not have to be as a labeled.

         The promissory note was securitized. Securitization requires the separation of the note from the mortgage. However, when brought up at an open Federal Hearing, the Magistrate Judge said that he did not want to hear any more about “separation of note and mortgage”. Rulings by the Alabama Supreme Court well documents the position of Alabama State Laws regarding separation note and the mortgage as a contract. The more colorful description of such per curum decision by the Alabama Supreme Court is communicated through the “Cow and the tail” parable. (Alabama law declares the mortgage and promissory note to be forever null and void, which both federal and state courts chose to ignore those laws, instead rule unlawfully without subject matter jurisdiction)

           Written correspondence from Wells Fargo clearly informs everyone that “Wells Fargo does not disperse original documents.”  Wells Fargo had sold the note and could not surrender the note when full payment is made, simply because one cannot surrender what he does not possess. (Judges declare the statements of barred attorneys as true.  Court declared contradictory unrebutted affidavit exhibits from Wells Fargo's vice president as a pack of lies not to believed. Individuals who are not a barred attorneys cannot make belivable and verified truthful statements in court filings . Un-sworn and unverified statements from barred attorneys are considered competent evidence.  Even though the law declares company records as self authenticating, state judges rule instead that unbarred individuals cannot speak truthfully even if the affidavits are sworn statements filed into the court records, filed as sworn true affidavits by company identified vice-president officials.  Partiality reigns in courts when attorneys are present especially when the issues can be made to  benefit a public municipality.)  

           Wells Fargo Bank NA performed a (simulated) foreclosure procedure in the presence of law enforcement, "sold" the property to the City of Ozark all without marketable title. The “clouded title” prevents any grant money from being spent for the improvement of the property by the city who has no clear title. To spend taxpayer’s funds acquired by grant for property improvements where there is no clear title is a criminal act. Wells Fargo Bank NA has assured that the property can no longer be maintained.

           The Plaintiff begged Wells Fargo to allow the Plaintiff to defend the title. The Plaintiff signed a covenant to defend the title. The date April 18, 2012 was established as the day for the exchange of funds needed to settle all remaining indebtedness, in exchange for evidence necessary to insure unquestionable clear and marketable title. The plaintiff was prevented from paying off the promissory note by an act of omission by Wells Fargo Bank NA. Interest accrual was suspended on that date of the official offer. Affidavits testifying to the availability of the funds were not rebutted, and neither was the date set for the exchange. WELL FARGO’s clouding of the title has obstructed the sale of the property years earlier. The then larger offer was accompanied by earnest money, which could not cure the unmarketable title inflicted by the defendants. Substantial funds were denied the Plaintiff.

           American Jurisprudence 2d under Interest and Usury §76 Generally; act or omission of creditor

     In the absence of an agreement to the contrary, when a debtor is ready and willing to pay an obligation, and intends to do so, but is prevented from doing so by the act or omission of the creditor, the accrual of interest on the obligation is suspended. Thus, the running of interest is suspended by the latches or unwarranted delay of a creditor in pressing his claim, but the un-exercised right of a decedent’s creditor to institute probate proceedings for the appointment of administrator does not preclude the accrual of interest on the debt. (The principle balance was about $130,000, which Wells Fargo refused full payment, refused payment by funds already on deposit, because it could present no evidence of debt as needed to assure unclouded marketable title conveyance.) (Adam and Eve also rejected the true, instead elected to embrace the statements made by the original Liar. Use of such patterns produce a "fig leaf" covering. The City of Ozark used law enforcement officers and roof top sniper's presence, plus paying double the alleged balance to make the simulated foreclosure look real and to not appear legal lunder).     

             The defendants prosecuted a foreclosure, in the presence of law enforcement. The defendant acted as an executor of a will as if the plaintiff were dead, incompetent or a juvenile.

         Ten months from April 18, 2012 until February 19, 2013, the defendants added an undisclosed amount of “accrued interest” to be added as their cost and for their benefit, all to come from the proceeds of the wrongful foreclosure. No accounting has been submitted to the plaintiff or to any court to identify this unlawful seizure of funds, which were lawfully belonging to the plaintiff. Even in “the land of OZ”, it is a custom and practice that funds above the amount needed to settle the debt cannot be held by the creditor as unlawful usury.

         Since the note was made a security, the document falls under yet another section of American jurisprudence 2d §110. Maturity of obligations or calls of securities

     In the case of certain debts, such as loans affected by municipalities and corporations of large capital, which are payable at a fixed and known place of payment and at a fixed period, at which place and time the creditor is to present his evidence of debt and receive payment, interest will stop from that moment, regardless of whether the evidence of indebtedness is presented, until the instruments are presented for payment and payment is refused, and it is not necessary, in order to escape after such accruing interest, that the amount along with accumulated interest at the time of the payment be kept separate from other funds the corporation, if it can be shown that the fund sufficient for payment where it all times in hand. The reason for this rule is that the evidence of indebtedness in such cases are usually so largely held in other states and abroad that is impossible in many instances for such corporations to know their creditors or when they are where they reside; hence, to hold that they must find them and tender the amount of the debt to before interest can be stopped would entail great confusion. It has also been held that the running of interest on interest coupons is suspended when the obligor under the principle evidence of indebtedness shows that he is ready or willing to pay.

     A maker of a loan which is payable on or before maturity may, by payment of the principal and accrued interest before maturity, relieves himself from the payment of unearned interest. Similarly the call of securities before maturity, and when probably made has the effect of stopping the running of interest thereafter. In the absence of a statue allowing constructive notice, it seems that, in order to stop interest, a county and municipal corporation desiring to exercise an option to retire bonds before maturity should give actual notice of such intentions to the bondholder, but this rule has been held not to apply to bonds which have many of the qualities of a negotiable instrument, such as those which are payable to bearer, title thereto passing by delivery, and which are not registrable, in which case it county or municipality will be relieved from further interest by the giving of such notice to the bondholders as is reasonable under the circumstances. However, if a municipality or county has actual knowledge that all the bonds of an issue about to be retired are held by unknown person or corporation, only actual notice of the call is reasonable notice.

       Interest on a lost bond will be allowed until the debtor tenders payment.

           Although the defendants pretend ignorance of their practices, their actions show the strict compliance with the manual published by Wells Fargo, published as a guide to be used in the defense of the illegal practices. The next thing on the manual’s agenda, as identified in WELLS FARGO BANK, NA’s manual, is the provision, when court ordered, of documents generated in an effort to deceive the court into believing that these generated “false documents” are in reality genuine.

         The Plaintiff has diligently searched the historic landscape to find the most succinct mental image that descriptive writing can bring to mind. Although the quotes below do not go into detail about the massive crime, the overall picture is palatable.

“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men, they create for themselves, in the course of time, a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” Federic Bastiat “The Law” 1850

 

“It can fairly be said that the chain of catastrophic bets made over the past decade by a few hundred bankers may well turn out to be the greatest non-violent crimeagainst humanity in history” Mr. Potter, Vanity Fair Magazine

          The pleadings above are but a fraction of the presentation planned for the jury in their consideration for the determination of the facts in this case. Maybe the spirit of Congressman Henry B. Steagall will guide the exposure of the heretofore undisclosed facts.

         The Plaintiff prays that proper attention by all parties be focused on these national issues especially the issue surrounding peonage and defendant’s default.

                                                         This request is and respectfully submitted by:

                                                 ____________________________________

                                                           By: Haywood Jackson Mizell, Plaintiff, pro se

                                                                 4518 Woodledge Drive

                                                                 Montgomery, Alabama 36109

                                                                 334-498-4187                    Date: 08/04/2014

LEGAL TITLE THAT IS SUPERIOR

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell                                                                     July 20, 2017

4518 Woodledge Drive                                   CERTIFIED MAIL 7013 1710 0002 1101 7705

Montgomery, AL 36109                       Return Receipt Requested 9590 9403 0711 5196 55783 46

This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

 

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

P.O. Box 10368

Des Moines, IA 50306-0368

ATTN: Leesa Whitt-Potter

Senior Vice President

Wells Fargo Home Lending

 

Subject: Request for instrument surrender Account 708-0128507779

 

Dear Leesa Whitt-Potter,

 

Thank you for your letter dated July 13, 2017. Your research is incomplete. Please allow me to state my primary concerns regarding your non-compliance. It is my duty to defend the title both equitable and legal.

 

Let me give you facts of record that should help in the completion of your research.

 

SIMPLE QUIET TITLE OR WHO HAS SUPERIOR TITLE?

As to Quiet Title Actions, Title Theory Explained, the title theory of mortgage law "splits the title [to a property] in two parts: the legal title, which becomes the mortgagee's and secures the underlying debt, and the equitable title, which the mortgagor retains." LemeLwn v. U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass)1, 721 F:3d 18, 21 at 23 (citing Bevilacqua v. Rodriguez, 955 N.B.2d 884, 894 (Mass 201I)) (internal quotation marks omitted); see also Houle v. Guilbeault, 40 A.2d 438,423 (R.I. 1944).

In real estate law, "equitable title" refers to a person's right to obtain full ownership of a property or property interest. This is often contrasted with or used in conjunction with the term "legal title." Legal title is the actual ownership of the land.

A mortgagor can reacquire this defeasible legal title by paying the debt which the mortgage secures.

Wells Fargo improperly refused prepayment or the purchase of the legal title. Default was used for a wrongful foreclosure. Wells Fargo had no valid lien and was not the holder in due course a sale without “cloud” over title was prohibited.

Alabama Title Theory (State)

A mortgage law theory that holds that from the date of the mortgage execution until the mortgage is satisfied or foreclosed, legal title belongs to the mortgagee and the right to possession belongs to the mortgagor while the mortgage is not in default. When prepayment is refused, there no longer can the word default be used thereby preventing foreclosure.

American Jurisprudence 2d  § 618. Liability for wrongful repossession

Furthermore, it has been said that where the creditor improperly refuses to accept payment of the debt, the creditor is estopped from repossessing the collateral on the basis that the debtor is in default, a conversion action is especially appropriate where wrongful repossession is at issue. (See Chesterton State Bank v Coffey (Ind App) 454 NE2d 1233.)

NOTE: James B. Graham agreed to provide funds already on deposit in satisfaction of any proven debt. Wells Fargo refused payment because it never loaned any money. FHLMC was the lender who sold the debt instrument that in turn was stolen.

American Jurisprudence 2d 1966: (Volume 25, Ejectment §19 Strength of own title)

A well-established principle which has acquired the force of a maxim is to the effect that a plaintiff in ejectment can recover only on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of his adversary’s. The defendant is not required to show title in himself, and he may lawfully say to the plaintiff, “Until you show title, you have no right to disturb me.”

No legal title was ever shown to be in the possession of Wells Fargo.

Ala. Code § 7-3-305. Defenses and Claims in Recoupment.

7-3-305c An obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument if the person seeking enforcement of the instrument does not have rights of a holder in due course and the obligor proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument.

 

We are not concerned with the promissory note of the loan. We are concerned only with the recorded title instruments, (Grant or Warranty Deed) which involves all matters involving title to the property along with all recorded security interest.

 

A mortgage is known as a security instrument which serve to secure the promissory note debt or loan obligation as against a certain parcel of property. The only difference is that a deed of trust possesses the “power of sale” authority, Alabama is a nonjudicial foreclosure statue state. If a default occurs, the lender orders the trustee to sell the property by publication (notice) and sale (generally on the courthouse steps). THE PROBLEM: THERE CAN NEVER BE DEFAULT WHEN PAYMENT IS REFUSED.

Superior title is represented in the grant the which represents ownership interest in the property as a grantee. The properties ownership is represented by the recording of what is known as the grant deed or Warranty Deed.

 

“BORROWER COVENANTS that Borrower is lawfully seised of the estate hereby conveyed and has the right to mortgage, grant and convey the Property and that the Property is unencumbered, except for encumbrances of record.  Borrower warrants and will defend generally the title to the Property against all claims and demands, subject to any encumbrances of record.”

 

Where is a “power of sale” instrument?

Wells Fargo possesses no authenticated instrument granting “power of sale”.

 

THE NOTE IS THE NOTE. TITLE IS THE TITLE.

The information from Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. cancel/rescind silence is proof that there was no “power of sale” authority. The information requested complete with proof of WF silence can be attached as exhibits in pleadings that are part of a prove-up process called deraignment.

 

“No title is conveyed through the sale” when a party who lacks a right to enforce the note proceeds with foreclosure sale. Williams, supra. Cited in Holms v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. et al, 43rd Jud. Cir. Ct. Div II, No. 08CN-CV00944 (Jan. 26, 2015).

 

A lender can foreclose on a borrower in default, but cannot evict without “prove-up” instruments containing “power of sale”. A note is an obligation to pay. Title conveyance can be purchased from one who has “power to sale”.


MAXIM OF LAW: What belongs to us cannot be transferred to another without our consent. But this must be understood with this qualification, that the government may take property for public use, paying the owner its value. The title to property may also be acquired, with the consent of the owner, by judgment of a competent tribunal.

 

WHO HAS SUPERIOR TITLE TO THE PROPERTY?

 

WHO HAS SUPERIOR TITLE TO THE PROPERTY is the question to be resolved by a quiet title action. Who is now vested with seisin (right to quiet title enjoyment), which includes the right to encumber the property.

The objective for filing a case for quiet title

The “thing” is a piece of property that must be rendered marketable again because there are defects in the chain of title and Wells Fargo and any other who profess to have any such interest in the title legally, do not. The primary purpose is to adjudicate the toxic, void and bad Title Instruments recorded against the property that is to be defended at all cost. Wells Fargo practiced “Robo-Signing” and made such practice commonplace. Now Wells Fargo is presenting instead the unsworn and unverified statement of barred attorneys as” competent evidence”. The lap-dogs (lawyers) for Wells Fargo are all brainwashed and trained, (See manual) to deflect attention from the title issue, but to instead focus on recorded false instruments.

 

MIZELL’S DUTY TO DEFEND

First One: Mizell’s name is either on the deed or it’s not.

NEEDED IN PLEADINGS: THE CLAIM OF SUPERIOR TITLE in pleadings and PROVE that no other claimant has any legitimate “potential adverse claim” to title to your property through an evidentiary process. (YOU MUST ASSERT YOUR RIGHTS). Chain of Title Assessment, or COTAs are not to be used as exhibits, but are valuable for use in deraignment of title.

                 a certified copy of warranty deed included as exhibit.

                 Contractual obligation to defend title.

                   Supporting Statutes and Case Law

Second One: A valid title report from a bono fide source, a report that can be attached to Mizell’s pleadings as exhibits.

Third One: Court ordered certificate of publication.

 

STATUE OF LIMITATION: NONE.

Alabama Property Rights & Remedies § 10.10(e) there is no statutory time within which an action to quiet title must be brought.

Anyone who claims an interest in the property must “prove it up.

 

American Jurisprudence 2d 1966: (Volume 25, Ejectment § 19 Strength of own title)

"A well-established principle which has acquired the force of a maxim is to the effect that a plaintiff in ejectment can recover only on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of his adversary's. The defendant is not required to show title in himself, and he may lawfully say to the plaintiff, "Until you show title, you have no right to disturb me." Thus, even against one without title, plaintiff cannot recover in ejectment unless he proves title or prior possession in himself; and if he recovers by virtue of prior possession, he may be said to recover as much upon the strength of his own title as if he had shown a good title to the premises. On the other hand, in order to prevail, plaintiff is not required to establish perfect title, all that is necessary being proof of a title superior to that of the defendant."

 

ALABAMA · (Title Theory State)

Adverse Possession Statute: Alabama Code § 6-5-200

Declaratory Judgment Statute: Alabama Code Article 5

Deficiency Judgment Statute: Alabama Code Title 35 (Deficiency judgments can be sought post-foreclosure or deed-in-lieu-of foreclosure in Alabama)

Lis Pendens Statute: Alabama Code § 35-4-131 (Notice of Actions)

Quiet Title Statute: Alabama Code§ 24-9-8 (2013)

     Service of process: Alabama Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 4.1

     U.C.C. Statute Title 7, Volume 6 (effective January 1, 1967)

Type of foreclosure State: Non-Judicial

Note Required to Foreclose: Either/Or, depending on circumstances Shall or May have “Power of Sale” is the question that gives way to the fraud, which is the qui tam subject.

 

Redemption Period: 3 years

 

Type of Tax Sale: Lien

 

Applicable Authority Allowing Challenges to Void, Voidable or Fraudulently

Recording Mortgage Documents Affecting Chain of Title:

 

1. Ala. Crim.Code, Title 13A, Ch. 9, Art. 1, § 13BA-9-4, Forgery; 2. Ala. Crim.Code Title 13A, Ch. 9, Art. 6, 13A-9-130(c)(l)(c), Residential mortgage fraud; 3. A common law right to cancellation of written instruments exists. See Woodlawn Theatre Co. v.Continental Securities Corp. of Alabama, 237 Ala. 88, 91 (1939). 4. Congress v.U.S. Bank, 98 So.3d 1165, 1169 (Ala. 2012), [Allows home owner to challenge an assignment and promissory note's authenticity.]

 

Statute Description and Actionability:

1. Ala. Crim.Code, Title 13A, Ch. 9, Art.1, § 13A-9-4 makes it a felony to falsify any written instrument to be filed or recorded in a public office; 2. Ala. Crim.Code Title BA, Ch. 9, Art. 6, § 13A-9-130©(1)© makes it a felony to file or a forged written instrument in a real estate transaction; 3. The criminal statues should be actionable pursuant to the Ala.Deceptive Trade Park. Act, Ala. Code§§ 8-19-5(27), 8-19-3(3), and 8-19-10.

 

Common Law or Civil Fraud Statute:

 

1. Ala.Civ.Code, Title 6, Ch. 5, Art. 8, l § 6-5-101, Fraud, Misrepresentations of Material Facts; 2. Common Law Fraud:“The elements of fraud are (1) a false representation (2) of a material existing fact (3) reasonably relied upon by the plaintiff {4) who suffered damage as a proximate

consequence of the   misrepresentation." Saia Food Distribs. &Club, Inc. v.

SecurityLink from Ameritech, Inc., 902 So.2d 46, 57 (Ala. 2004).

 

ALABAMA STATE CASE NOTES:

As to Quiet Title Actions, General: In Wise v. Massee, 239 Ala. 559 (Ala. 1940), the court Observed that “in action to quiet title, a certain, continuous identification of the property is necessary.

 

HOW TO ADVANCE THE PROJECT

 

  1. 1.Make Ozark attractive as a tourist attraction
    1. 2.Broad Street renovated as visit to previous periods rich in historical events and symbols.
    2. 3.Advance Fort Rucker’s Army Aviation Museum to the number one Ala. tourist attraction.
    3. 4.Show Fort Rucker as the destination for all world governments to train helicopter pilots.
    4. 5.Show Southeast Alabama as the capital for the harvest of peanuts.
    5. 6.Associate Ozark with white beach sands that are only a short distance away.
    6. 7.Film stories about Ozark, the army aviation and the south for marketing.

 

WHAT HAS BEEN DONE AS THE FOUNDATION FOR THE PROJECT

 

Aviation Museum Open

Warrior Hall 1.4 billion facility for the simulator training of helicopter pilots.

Peanuts are the number one cash crop in southeast Alabama.

Broad street has experience over $4million in renovations.

Two of ten screen play ready for production.

Panama City has now an international airport.

Ozark has State Junior College for aviation skills.

 

WHAT IS THE MAJOR OBSTACLE?

 

“Clouded Title” must be removed form Holman House on Broad Street. “Cloud” imposed by powerful “criminal enterprise”.

Restore the maxim denied by Wells Fargo:

It is against equity to deprive freeman of the free disposal of their own property. Co. Litt. 223. See 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 455, 460.

 

The return of the property to marketability will be done.

 

Yours truly,

 

 

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell

334-239-8987

Crime committed by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

 

November 06, 2012

Alice Faye Mizell                                     CERTIFIED MAIL #7010 2780 0001 0046 1946

285 East Broad Street

Ozark, AL [36360]

 

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

MAC X3803-03A

8480 Stagecoach Circle

Frederick, MD 21701

 

RE: Loan Number 0128507779

       Mortgagor: Alice Faye Mizell

 

       Property:     285 East Broad Street

                             Ozark, AL 36360-1522

 

Gentlemen,

 

This letter is to respond to your letter dated October 31, 2012 regarding the elimination of the above loan and your refusal to balance the account and bring to zero. The absence of documentation requested from you indicates you have no documents, or your efforts are worthless and there are no terms or note or mortgage loan. It is appropriate that you consider worthless any document to satisfy your non-existent documents in any attempt to bring to zero the account balance. Title 15 supports our exercise our legal right to validate of the debt that WFHM claims is owed.

 

Please refer to previous correspondence outlining our demand that the original document be surrendered simultaneous with the instrument paid in full. Along with a certified copy of the original instrument (no photo copy) you must provide a certified statement of the amount that must be submitted so that the instrument can be satisfied and consequently surrendered when paid in full.

You have refused improperly to accept payment of the debt. You stated in writing that you never “disburse original documents”. American Jurisprudence 2d stops repossession of the collateral on the basis that the debtor is in default.  

 

A tireless attempt has been made requesting that you provide us the verification documentation specifically providing a certified copy of the original document with said certification signed under the penalty of perjury.

We have requested that you Provide proof of claim signed under penalty of perjury and certification by an officer and/or agent authorized and/or permitted to provide such certification and/or authorization. That you Exhibit the original instrument in accordance with the UCC inter alia, and Alabama state Law, U.C.C. § 3-501(B)(12), inclusive of the genuine original Promissory Note and genuine original allonge(s) showing chain of title, the official accounting leger, inclusive of the following forms and OMB numbers of the forms to show the record of financial interest in the Promissory Note:

 

1.         Proof of the existence of an account of the actual establishment of debt account by the actual Sentient humans Haywood Jackson Mizell and Alice Faye Mizell, duly signed and written out by both parties and not any unilateral agreement. This would include but not be limited to the actual agreement upon which the signature page has direct reference to the entire agreement (note HAYWOOD JACKSON MIZELL and ALICE FAE MIZELL is an artificial collective entity, a title, of the limited liability fictitious corporation which is legal trade mark, which constitutes valuable legal interest of which all rights, title and interest are reserved and of which you have failed to notify the Caretaker and acceptance agent and supply proof of claim against the limited liability corporation.

 

2.         Proof of claim that WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE are the original Holder in due course, of the aforementioned original debt instrument, and that it is not being un-sold to another party.

 

3.         A copy of actual accounting, original leger whereby WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, has incurred a loss as a result of the alleged debt.

 

4.         An invoice (not a statement), for any amount of money allegedly owed to WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE by Haywood Jackson Mizell and Alice Faye Mizell.

 

5.         Provide proof of claim there is any money in circulation is backed by anything of value, by which any debt including this one that lends to the possibility that WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE might get paid by way of actual money. And that the value of the document noted in you October 31, 2012 letter is not sufficient to discharge this debt under the following laws:

 

 

Fair debt collection Practices ACT (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., 1978 Title VIII of the Consumer Credit Protection ACT of 1978

The Indentured Trust ACT of 1939

HJR 192, 112 Statutes at Large 48, and P.L. 73.10 of 1933

EMERGENCY ECONOMIC RELIEF ACT May 12 1933

The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

The Fair Credit reporting Act Public Law No. 91-508 enacted in 1970

The Bankruptcy ACT of 1933

12 USC 411, P.L. 97-280

UCC 1-103, 1-308, 2-221, 2-104, 3-415-419, 3-501-510

6.         Also provide these further items if associated with this matter in any fashion and or form. . .

                        (a) Federal Reserve form S3 registration statement,

                        (b) Federal Reserve form 424(b)(5) prospectus,

                        (c) Federal Reserve form FR 2046 balance sheet(s),

                        (d) Federal Reserve form FR 2049 balance sheet(s),

                        (e) Federal Reserve form 2099 balance sheet(s),

                        (f) The Deed of Trust.

                        (g) Chain of custody

 

                         This is a lawful request in accords with the aforementioned and the following:

 

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS..PART 5. DISHONOR

§ 3-501. PRESENTMENT.

 

pursuant to the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, 15 USC 1692g Sec. 809 (b) that your claim is disputed and validation is requested.

 

U.C.C. - ARTICLE 3 - NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS..PART 5. DISHONOR

§ 3-501. PRESENTMENT.

(a) "Presentment" means a demand made by or on behalf of a person entitled to enforce an instrument (i) to pay the instrument made to the drawee or a party obliged to pay the instrument or, in the case of a note or accepted draft payable at a bank, to the bank, or (ii) to accept a draft made to the drawee.

(b) The following rules are subject to Article 4, agreement of the parties, and clearing-house rules and the like:

 

(2) Upon demand of the person to whom presentment is made, the person making presentment must (i) exhibit the instrument, (ii) give reasonable identification and, if presentment is made on behalf of another person, reasonable evidence of authority to do so, and (iii) sign a receipt on the instrument for any payment made or surrender the instrument if full payment is made.

 

                 By refusing to supply you will be violating the law and my rights under UCC.

 

                   Once Again this is NOT a request for "verification" or proof of my mailing address, but a request for VALIDATION made pursuant to the above named Title and Section (as well as other laws both federal and local). It is respectfully requested that your offices provide competent evidence that there is any legal obligation to pay in accords with the aforementioned laws.

 

Please provide and or furnish the following:

· What the money you say owed is for;

· Explain and show how your offices calculated what allegedly is owed;

· Provide a certified copy of the original signed instrument that shows agreement to pay what is allegedly owed;

· Provide a verification or certified copy of any judgment if applicable;

· Identify the original creditor in this matter and the contractual agreement employing your company.

· Proof that the Statute of Limitations has not expired on this account

· Show that you are licensed to collect in the State of Alabama.

· Provide verification of your license numbers and Registered Agent and well as EIN.

 

                       It come of necessity and obligation to inform you that if your offices have reported invalidated information to any of the Credit bureaus/agencies such action will be construed as fraud under both Federal and State Laws. Further if any negative marks are found on any of portion of the credit file associated with this matter by your company or the company that you represent it will come necessary to bring legal action against you for the following:

·           Violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act

·           Violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act

·           Defamation of Character

.       and may include any of the following means:

   administrative review, SEC Hearing, LIEN and or Law suit.

 

                   If you and your offices are able to provide the proper documentation (originals and or certified copies of verified documents) as requested in the aforegoing Declaration, it will receive a prompt response, however at least 30 days will be needed to investigate and review the validity of the information provided and during such time all collection activity MUST cease and desist in good faith.

 

                     Further during this validation period, should any action be undertaken which could be construed as detrimental to any portion of the credit files related hereto, it will constitute a breach and will result in consultation with legal counsel. This includes any listing of any information to any credit reporting repository that could be inaccurate or invalid or verifying an account as accurate when in fact there is no certified valid proof that it is.

 

                       Your offices have 15 calendar days to respond to this validation/certified verification request, if a response is not received within 15 days from the date of your receipt of this presentment, all references to this account must be deleted and completely removed from the credit file and a certified copy of such deletion confirmation shall be sent to the addressee immediately.

 

                       It is further requested, and you are now given notice that all contracts adhesion and or otherwise are hereby terminated with your company. That no communication via telephonic, e-mail correspondence, written correspondence, and or electronic correspondence shall be had between your company and the client, you are hereby commanded an ordered to cease and desist in such communication. You are to communicate via written correspondence only to the following address under the following name:

 

James B. Graham

1393 Jernigan Road

Ozark, Alabama [36360]

 

Should your offices attempt telephone communication with the client, including but not limited to computer generated calls and calls or correspondence sent to or with any third parties, it will be considered harassment and result in a fee assessment of one thousand dollars per instance per issue. All future communications with the client MUST be done in writing and sent to the address noted above via USPS.

 

                     This document and all communication from the client and our offices are peaceful communication, non-combative, non- aggressive, and without dishonor. It would be advisable that you assure that your records are in order if there’s a likelihood of the need to take legal action. This is a good faith attempt to correct your records; any information obtained shall be used solely for that purpose. We have accepted your claim under the condition of validated proof of claim including an uninterrupted chain of recording.

 

                        You are hereby ordered, commanded, direct it to cease and desist any and all collection activities including but not limited to foreclosure proceedings, Sheriffs sales, trustee sales, negative reporting activity as this matter is now in dispute and by law (the aforementioned laws are mentioned as well as the Uniform Commercial Code as well as American Jurisprudence 2d), and until this disputed matter has been resolved you may not and shall not continue proceedings in foreclosure and or collections in reference this matter until verification (as required by law documented and proven certified facts), shall have been produced. You have 15 CALENDAR days to comply with the above demanded information!

 

                           You may choose either option, to balance the account and bring to zero. Or you may choose the option of providing us the verification documentation requested above.

 

We send our Best Regards,

 

____________________

Alice Faye Mizell

NO DALE COUNTY JAIL TIME FOR WF's THEFT THERE

 

NBC NEWS REPORT January 23, 2020

   John Stumpf, the former head of Wells Fargo who presided over the bank's cross-selling scandal, has been barred from ever working for a bank, federal officials announced on Thursday.

     “The actions announced by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency today reinforce the agency’s expectations that management and employees of national banks and federal savings associations provide fair access to financial services, treat customers fairly, and comply with applicable laws and regulations,” Comptroller of the Currency Joseph Otting said in a statement.

     Eight former executives were fined for their role in the sales fraud, including Carrie Tolstedt, head of the community banking division at the center of the scandal. Stumpf has agreed to pay a $17.5 million personal fine, and Tolstedt is facing a penalty that regulators say could top $25 million.

   The once-thriving San Francisco-based banking giant has experienced sluggish demand for its services since the scandal first came to light in 2016. It has paid $185 million in fines for unethical sales practices that included opening around 3.5 million fake accounts without customer authorization. It has also settled a $110 million class-action lawsuit and is currently facing a slew of lawsuits that could total $3 billion.

     About 5,300 staff members were fired in connection with the fraud. Stumpf abruptly retired from the company in October 2016, not long after facing blistering questions from congressional panels. The bank has since cycled through several senior executives and CEOs.

     An investigation by the bank's own board in 2017 blamed top management for creating an "aggressive sales culture" that led to the phony accounts. Wells' board singled out Stumpf and Tolstedt, saying both executives dragged their feet for years regarding problems at what was then the second-largest U.S. bank, and were ultimately unwilling to accept criticism that the bank's sales-focused business model was failing.

     Many current and former employees talked of intense and constant pressure from managers to sell and open accounts, and some said it pushed them into unethical behavior. The report backs up those employees' accounts. The board also found that Stumpf was unwilling to change Wells' business model when problems arose.

     "His reaction invariably was that a few bad employees were causing issues ... he was too late and too slow to call for inspection or critical challenge to (Wells') basic business model," the board said.

     Shares in Wells Fargo were down by around 0.5 percent Thursday afternoon.

Wells Fargo Potential Unauthorized Accounts Grows to 3.5 Million  Aug. 31, 201701:40

Waiting until ONE BILLION DOLLARS

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell                                                               January 03, 2019

4518 Woodledge Drive      

Montgomery, AL 36109                       Certified Mail 7018 3090 0001 9985 3564

                                                             Return Receipt 9590 9402 4949 9063 7991 48

                                        

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

Return Mail Operations

P.O. Box 10368

Des Moines, IA 50306·0368

ATTN: Amy Wachter

Senior Vice President

Customer Care and Recovery Group

 

Subject: Acknowledgment your typical letter addressed to Alice Faye Mizell and signed by Amy Wachter of December 26, 2019, Account 708·0128507779. The identity information regarding the Mortgage Banker Bond, policy number and claim department, were not mentioned. Mentioned was request for purchase of additional time. The outstanding obligation and agreed to amount for WF purchase of time: Total due as of January 01, 2020---$605,220,224.12

 

Dear Amy Wachter,

 

This letter is to response to your letter dated 12/26/2019. The above referenced contract was secured by both parties, the borrower secured the promise to pay with real estate that was wrongfully foreclosed upon and Wells Fargo secured their lawful conduct as lender with a Mortgage Banker Bond to be filed in the records of the Dale County Alabama Probate Office. WF’s failure to file the Mortgage Banker Bond into the record is one of WF’s defaults. WF has elected unlimited exposure and purchase of time until such time research has located the bond for execution. Such location determination could limit WF’s exposure, provided the bond is located, which establishes lawful limits to WF’s defaults that are illegal.

 

Needless to say, the time purchase amount is valid only as compensation for a default and is established by consent of both parties. Consent has been granted after proper notification and has been agreed to by a 30-day response silence identified and connected to each written request as clarified by each request for additional time. The current monthly time extension request is approximately $3.6 million as agreed to, and similar to late payment fees.

 

The borrower, and neither can the lender, lawfully exact collection of the security instrument without, judicial or consensual non-judicial, review. It is always best to let law enforcement lawfully make the collection, all without disturbance of the peace.

As borrower, the monthly additional fee amount is such that it is unwise to dishonor time extension requests short of reaching $1 billion. On the other hand, the borrower cannot prevent the lender’s default curative efforts in curtailing lender’s exposure.

 

WF’s Mortgage Banker Bond default existed from the beginning and continues even today, and without dispute or dissent as to its default liability.

 

Your truly,

 

 

 

Signed for Alice Faye Mizell by her husband Haywood Jackson Mizell

 

Enclosed copy of your letter dated 12/26/2019.

"the purpose of the law is to prevent injustice from reigning"

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell                                                 December 20, 2019

4518 Woodledge Drive      

Montgomery, AL 36109                       Certified Mail 7018 3090 0001 9985 3557

                                                             Return Receipt 9590 9402 4949 9063 7991 31

                                        

Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

P.O. Box 10335

Des Moines, IA 50306·0335

ATTN: Joshua Naber

Executive Resolution Specialist

Customer Care and Recovery Group

 

Subject: Acknowledgment your letter of December 17, 2019, Account 708·0128507779. The identity information regarding the Mortgage Banker Bond, policy number and claim department, were not mentioned. Mentioned was the attempt to insult and mislead by declaring WF to not be the holder-in-due-course, instead claiming to be simply “note holder”. Additional time requested to respond at later date. The outstanding obligation and agreed to amount for WF purchase of time: Total due as of December 01, 2019---$601,585,645.08

 

Dear Joshua Naber,

    

     The attempt to insult my intelligence is not appreciated. My decades long request has been for the identity of the holder-in-due-course, which alone can be paid in full. We agree that WF is the SERVICER that cannot foreclose in its own name. Also, we accept WF’s continuing report that it is not the holder-in-due-course, but instead a “CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE” thief. Why parade non-disclosure?

 

“A jury could find it strange that those who insist that their conduct was proper and the intent pure went to such great lengths to hide it all from the light of day. From such secrecy much may be inferred.” Cox v. Adm”r U.S. Steel & Carnegie, 17 F.3d 1386, 1402 (11th Cir. 1994).

  

     Baker and Donaldson has been, by affidavit, declared to possess the collateral file. WF does not disburse original documents, just electronic copies only.

 

     All spurious and electronic-computer-generated documents are worthless when compared to the ORIGINAL PROMISSORY NOTE, which WF’s obligation to surrender the original stamped paid-in-full has not been met. No state or federal law can exempt WF from this, to date, unmet obligation. See FRCP 1002. Null and void means nothing as pretended by WF.

 

    

     Allow me to refresh your awareness:

    

     Alabama State law declares the wrongful foreclosure auction null and void because Wells Faro Bank, N. A. was not the holder-in-due course of the Note. Freddie Mac was the lender as reported to the IRS. Wells Fargo foreclosed wrongfully in its own name even though not entitled to the funds generated by the auction contrary to §35-10-1.

 

Section 35-10-9 Sales contrary to article null and void.

All sales of real estate, made under powers contained in mortgages or deeds of trust contrary to the provisions of this article, shall be null and void, notwithstanding any agreement or stipulation to the contrary.

 

     No debt instrument has been surrendered for authentication, which can be replaced by a court judgment.

 

Moreover, in the case of original mortgages and promissory notes, they are not merely exhibits but instruments which must be surrendered prior to the issuance of a judgment. The judgment takes the place of the promissory note. Surrendering the note is essential so that it cannot thereafter be negotiated. See Perry v. Fairbanks Capital Corp., 888 So.2d 725, 726 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). The judgment cancels the note. The clerk cannot return these instruments to the parties. Johnston v. Hudlett, 32 So. 3d 700 (Fla 4d DCA 2010)

 

Servedio v. US Bank N.A (4D10-1898)

The summary judgment order should be reversed because the lender did not file “a copy of the original note and mortgage prior to the entry of judgment the original mortgage note with the trial court.” Even if the trial court considered the note and mortgage at the hearing, the documents were not authenticated, filed, and served more than twenty days before the hearing as required byRules1.510(c), 1.510(e) and Appellee’s failure to abide by these rules also necessitates reversing the order granting summary judgment. Verizzo, 28 So. 3d at 977-78; Mack v. Commercial Indus. Park, Inc., 541 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).

 

     The Dale County Circuit Clerk stated that no original has ever been filed by WF. All court actions are null and void. (See enclosed Clerk’s declaration.)

 

§13A-9-12 (3) (3)

     Knowing he lacks the authority to retain a governmental record he refuses to deliver up the record in his possession upon proper request of a person lawfully entitled to receive such record for examination or other purposes. (See Title 18 §1512 for 20-year exposure.)

 

     It might be helpful to revisit another similar WF case and its outcome that opens an argument for equal justice under the law.

 

“No title is conveyed through the sale when a party who lacks a right to enforce the note proceeds with foreclosure sale.” Williams, supra. Cited in Holms v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. et al, 43rd Jud. Cir. Ct. Div II, No. 08CN-CV00944 (Jan. 26, 2015).

 

     More Alabama law:

“Alabama law specifically contemplates that there can be a separation. See § 35–10–12 and Harton [v. Little, 176 Ala. 267, 57 So. 851 (1911)]. The Restatement (Third) of Property: Mortgages takes the position that a note and mortgage can be separated but that ‘[t]he mortgage becomes useless in the hands of one who does not also hold the obligation because only the holder of the obligation can foreclose.’ Restatement (Third) of Property: Mortgages § 5.4, Reporter's Note—Introduction, cmt. a at 386. The Restatement explains: “‘The note is the cow and the mortgage the tail. The cow can survive without a tail, but the tail cannot survive without the cow.’ Id. at 387 (quoting Best Fertilizers of Arizona, Inc. v. Burns, 117 Ariz. 178, 179, 571 P.2d 675, 676 (Ct.App.), reversed on other grounds, 116 Ariz. 492, 570 P.2d 179 (1977)).” Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama. Diane GRAY v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION. 2120087. Decided: January 10, 2014 (Emphasis added)

 

While Bank of America alleged in its unverified complaint that it was the holder of the note and mortgage, the copy of the note attached to the amended complaint contradicts that allegation. When exhibits are attached to a complaint, the contents of the exhibits control over the allegations of the complaint. Khan v. Bank of America (Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 5th Dist. 2011) (See 1099A report to IRS that WF was not the lender)

 

     Larger print can sometimes be helpful to understanding. WF seems to have never heard of the infallible truth recorded in Job 32:8.

 

     Quitting from being a deadbeat is an admirable quality for any morale entity.

 

     2 Samuel 10:12 encourages us to Be of good courage, and let us play the men for our people, and for the cities of our God; and the Lord do that seemeth him good.

 

Yours truly,

 

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell

334-498-4187

 

Enclosed: Your letter dated December 17, 2019

                 Statement of NO original from Clerk

                 1099A identifying actual lender

               WITHOUT RECOURSE transfer to real possessor of note

             Offer to pay in full in full written to Carle Murray

           James B. Graham’s offer to provide full payment that was

                   IMPROPERLY REFUSED.

 

FRAUDULENT CONVEYANCE:

American Jurisprudence 2d  § 618. Liability for wrongful repossession

Furthermore, it has been said that where the creditor improperly refuses to accept payment of the debt, the creditor is estopped from repossessing the collateral on the basis that the debtor is in default, a conversion action is especially appropriate where wrongful repossession is at issue. (See Chesterton State Bank v Coffey (Ind App) 454 NE2d 1233.) (See (MISC Book 282, pages 295 and 296).

 

COPY

 

December 17; 2019                                              

 

Haywood Jackson Mizell 4518 Woodledge Drive

Montgomery, AL 36109

 

Subject: Information about account number 0128507779 for Alice F. Mizell Dear Haywood Jackson Mizell:

Thank you for the opportunity to address your request. We want you to know we're here to help. We're responding and want to make sure you have the information you need.

Note holder information

We're the servicer and assignee for the account. You may contact us at: Wells Fargo Home Mortgage

POBox10335

Des Moines, IA 50306

Phone number: 1-800-853-8516

We will respond to your additional requests at a later date.

Going forward

 

We value your feedback and appreciate the time and effort you took to contact us. It's been my goal to fully address the request you've brought to our attention.

 

If you have any questions, I'm here to help. You may reach me at 1-800-853-8516, extension 1335621039. I am available to assist you Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Central Time. If you require immediate assistance and I am unavailable, other representatives are available to assist you at 1-800-853-8516, Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Central Time.

 

Sincerely,

-"2

Joshua Naber

Executive Resolution Specialist Customer Care and Recovery Group

 

CC:      Alice F. Mizell

4518 Woodledge Dr

Montgomery, AL 36109

 

Mr. Mizell:

 

Enclosed please find a copy of Wells Fargo Loan/Mortgage# 0128507779. We cannot certify that this is· a true copy of the original because the original was not filed in the clerk's office.

 

                                                                                                                   DALE COUNTY CIRCUIT CLERK

                                                                                                                              P.O. BOX 1350

                                                                                                                  OZARK, ALABAMA 36361

                                                                                                                      TELEPHONE: 334-774-5003

 

NOTE: Received by mail

             October 25, 2019

1099-A

DATED 1/21/2014

 

WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A.’s REPORT

TO IRS IDENTITY OF ACTUAL LENDER’S

NAME, ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE NUMBER

 

LENDER WHO HAS NOT FORECLOSED AS HOLDER IN DUE COURSE:

                            

                             FHLMC

                             8609 WESTWOOD CENTER DRIVE

                             PO BOX 5003

                             VIENNA, VA 22108

 

WITHHELD LENDERS FEDERAL IDENTIFICATION NUMBER: 52-0904874

 

PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS INVESTOR CLIENT 708

CUSIP NUMBER: 0128507779

 

WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC.’s

Transfer of note without recorded assignment,

sometime before 2009. No longer with enforcement rights of a holder in due course.

 

STAMPED AND SIGNED AS BELOW:

 

WITHOUT RECOURSE

PAY TO THE ORDER OF

 

 

WELLS FARGO HOME MORTGAGE, INC.

 

BY: ____________ See signature _____________

       Heather Partin, Assistant Secretary

 

Sign Original Only!

 

 

  1. 1.OFFER OF FULL PAYMENT BY ALICE FAYE MIZELL DATED JANUARY 9, 2012, SERVED BY CERTIFIED MAIL WAS IMPROPERLY REFUSED. THE SURRENDER OF AUTHENTICATED NOTE AFTER HAVING BEEN PAID IN FULL WAS IGNORED.

 

  1. 2.NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT OF REFINANCE COMMITMENT BY JAMES B. GRAHAM DATED SEPTEMBER 3, 2013.

 

  1. 3.AFFIDAVIT BY CHARLES EUGENE RUTLEDGE DATED SEPTEMBER 3, 2013 CONFIRMING PRESENCE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT AT AUCTION CONDUCTED FEBRUARY 19, 2013 ON BEHALF OF WELLS FARGO NOT FHLMC.

 

NOTE:

Letter dated March 23, 2017 signed by William G. Berry, Foreclosing Attorney at Morris-Hardwick-Schneider stated:

 

“snipers were placed on the roof of the courthouse.” “My managing partner at the time, Barry King, cried the sale on behalf of Wells Fargo.”

Frederic Bastiat in 1850 made this observation in The Law.

“the purpose of the law is to prevent injustice from reigning.”

 

“When plunder becomes a way of life

For a group of men,

They create for themselves

In the course of time

A legal system that authorizes it

And a moral code that glorifies it.”

 

“It can fairly be said that

The chain of catastrophic bets

Made over the past decade

By a few hundred bankers

May well turn out to be the

Greatest non-violent crime

Against humanity in history”

Mr. Potter, Vanity Fair Magazine

 

“When a portion of wealth passes out of the hands of him who has acquired it, without his consent, and without compensation, to him who has not created it, whether by force or by artifice, I say that property is violated, that plunder is perpetrated. I say that this is exactly what the law ought to repress always and everywhere. If the law itself performs the action it ought to repress, I say that plunder is still perpetrated, and even, in a social point of view, under aggravated circumstances. In this case however, he who profits from the plunder is not responsible for it; it is the lawgiver, society itself, and this is where the political danger lies. I declare that I do not mean to impugn the intentions nor the morality of anybody. I am attacking an idea that I believe to be false-a system that appears to me to be unjust; and this is so independent of intentions, that each of us profits by it without wishing it, and suffers from it without being aware of the cause.”  

VICTIMS OF LAWFUL PLUNDER

Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter — by peaceful or revolutionary means — into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.

Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws! Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests.

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

 

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

     RES JUDICATA GIVES ADDRESS to location of TWO filed copies. Copy ONE was from the 2003 closing. ALTERED copy TWO was within days after the closing, the Note (the “cow”) and Mortgage (the “tail”) were separated, all rights and interest in the “Cow” was transferred to FHLMC complete with indorsement, altered, stamped “WITHOUT RECOURSE and the CUSIP NUMBER redacted. The Mortgage (the “tail”) was retained by Wells Fargo and made into a false filed instrument used as alleged authority to foreclose. Originals scanned, shredded.

     No assignment was recorded because the GSE refused to incur and pay the $12.50 transfer fee. Attorneys for Wells Fargo convinced the courts the mortgage alone would support WF’s foreclosure even though no default had occurred due to the facts of a prepayment in full offer that was improperly refused. NO paid-in-full Note has been surrendered even after the liquidation of the asset was payment in full. The scanned and then destroyed original Note is still electronically in circulation performing as a non-producing asset on the investment banking side.

     Which one of the contradicting copies is to be judged acceptable? NEITHER.

     Quiet Title Action requires PROOF OF CLAIM, THE ORIGINAL. No Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 has been filed by Wells Fargo that could impact title because Wells Fargo has sold its interest before 2009 and no longer has standing by virtue of it NO LONGER POSSESSES an Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 that can prove claim.

     Attorneys are required to be compliant, guided by court rules. Courts have their own rules that govern the discipline of attorneys. Un-sworn and un-verified statements by barred attorneys are not competent evidence. Judgment based on fact witnesses is a requirement and is now needed in this Quiet Title Action.

     What would the Defendant’s Attorneys have the court to believe? Ninety percent of all mortgages in American are similarly separated with un-recorded assignments, thus un-enforceable as ruled by the Kansa State Supreme Court in a 2009 ruling. In fact, many similarly styled Quiet Title Action cases in Dale County Circuit Court has enjoyed NO court judgment. § 35-10-9 declares this mortgage, as well as all similar mortgages, null and void by virtue of the fact that Wells Fargo is not entitled to the funds. The error must be corrected. Filing of a false instrument cannot be assigned by a judicial court as true without the assignor losing judicial immunity.

 

STATEMENT OF RELIEF SOUGHT AND ISSUES PRESENTED

    

     Appellant is seeking a Writ of Mandamus from this Honorable Court directing Kimberly A. Clark, Dale County Circuit Judge, to take judicial notice that case 26-CV-2019-000008.00 is a Quiet Title Action where legal title is all that is in issue in the action, and such title, when ascertained, whether in the plaintiff or in the defendant, draws to it a REQUIRED JUDGEMENT OF THE COURT. Judge Clark dismissed in error the Quiet Title Action upon res judicata motion by Defendants. Original and authenticated instruments that could impact title have never appeared or filed.

Alabama Property Rights and Remedies

§ 10.10(c) “there is no statutory time which an action to quiet title must be brought.”

 

     The required elements for mandamus relief are as follows:

 

1) a clear legal right in the petitioner to the order sought; 2) an imperative duty upon the respondent to perform, accompanied by a refusal to do so; 3) the lack of another adequate remedy; and 4) properly invoked jurisdiction of the court.

 

In order to justify the dismissal of a pro se complaint, it must be " 'beyond doubt that the plaintiff can prove no set of facts in support of his claim which would entitle him to relief.' " Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. at 521, 92 S.Ct. at 594 (quoting Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 45-46, 78 S.Ct. 99, 102, 2 L.Ed.2d 80 (1957)).

 

The Court Official must show on what authority her decision is based upon and must prove her authority to do or not do something. Failing this, the court must decide for the petitioner, who may be any person, not just an interested party.

 

   The plaintiff’s Quiet Title Action Complaint was dismissed based on Defendant’s motion for res judicata. Judge Kimberly Clark also ordered dismissal in previous case 26-CV-2013-000006.00 based on her ASSIGNMENT of “superior” merit to unsworn and unverified statements of Defendant’s counsel above DEFENDANT’S OWN EXHIBITS THAT CONTRADICT THE ATTORNEY STATEMENTS.

     In the 2013 case, was filed a notarized affidavit of Andres Kruse, Vice President Loan Department Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as EXHIBIT 1 and attached its EXHIBIT A, a true and correct (altered) copy of the Note and Mortgage. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. is a division of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

     EXHIBIT A, filed by the Defendant in its pleadings, is a copy of the original and “UNALTERED” Adjustable Rate Mortgage showing no redacted CUSIP NUMBER.

     See the Kruse Affidavit’s promissory note, page 158 of the official record from the referenced res judicata case 26-CV-2013-000006 and Defendant’s EXHIBIT A and COMPARE the level of interest held by WF before and WF’s NO interest level after the sale of the note. Both documents are attached to this Writ of Mandamus request.

     Official Record page 158 establishes, beyond dispute, the ZERO level of interest the Defendant, Wells Fargo has, as its PROOF OF CLAIM and its STANDING for consideration in the Quiet Title Action. To date, Wells Fargo has denied courts the gaining of subject-matter jurisdiction. Judge Clark has ignored Rule 12(h)(3) and 12(b)(1):

Rule 12(h)3 Lack of Subject-Matter Jurisdiction. If the court determines at any time that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction, the court MUST dismiss the action.

 

Rule 12 (b)(1) lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

 

Standing requires that the party prosecuting the action have a sufficient stake in the outcome and that the party bringing the claim be recognized in the law as being a real party in interest ENTITLED to bring the claim. This entitlement to prosecute a claim in Alabama courts rests exclusively in those persons granted by substantive law, the power to enforce the claim. ‘[t]he mortgage becomes useless in the hands of one who does not also hold the obligation because ONLY THE HOLDER OF THE OBLIGATION CAN FORECLOSE.’ Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama. Diane GRAY v. FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION. 2120087. Decided: January 10, 2014.

 

“A party lacks standing to invoke the jurisdiction of a court unless he has, in an individual or a representative capacity, some real interest in the subject matter of an action.” Wells Fargo Bank, v. Byrd, 178 Ohio App.3d 285, 2008-Ohio-4603, 897 N.E.2d 722 (2008). It went on to hold,” If plaintiff has offered no evidence that it owned the note and mortgage when the complaint was filed, it would not be entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Also, Kumar Corp. v Nopal Lines, Ltd, et al, 462 So. 2d 1178, (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

 

Wells Fargo v. Reyes, 867 N.Y.S.2d 21 (2008). Dismissed with prejudice, Fraud on Court & Sanctions. Wells Fargo never owned the Mortgage.

 

     It was never “Show me the note”.  Mizell is attacking Wells Fargo on the “show me standing” and “show me that Wells Fargo Bank, N. A. is the real and beneficial party of interest who has the right to enforce the note”.

     Judge Clark also ignored the truthful fact report to the IRS identifying the actual lender to be FHLMC, not Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. See attached Form 1099A.

     The promissory Note was SOLD at some time prior to 2009, separated from the mortgage that Wells Fargo retained. Other courts have issued rulings germane to this mandamus requests. This Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama is on record as ruling:

Mortgages takes the position that a note and mortgage can be separated but that ‘[t]he mortgage becomes useless in the hands of one who does not also hold the obligation because only the holder of the obligation can foreclose.’ ‘The note is the cow and the mortgage the tail. The cow can survive without a tail, but the tail cannot survive without the cow.”

 

No debt instrument has been surrendered for authentication, which can be replaced by a court judgment.

Moreover, in the case of original mortgages and promissory notes, they are not merely exhibits but instruments which must be surrendered prior to the issuance of a judgment. The judgment takes the place of the promissory note. Surrendering the note is essential so that it cannot thereafter be negotiated. See Perry v. Fairbanks Capital Corp., 888 So.2d 725, 726 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). THE JUDGMENT CANCELS THE NOTE. THE CLERK CANNOT RETURN THESE INSTRUMENTS TO THE PARTIES. Johnston v. Hudlett, 32 So. 3d 700 (Fla 4d DCA 2010)

 

           Servedio v. US Bank N.A (4D10-1898)

The summary judgment order should be reversed because the lender did not file “a copy of the original note and mortgage prior to the entry of judgment the original mortgage note with the trial court.” Even if the trial court considered the note and mortgage at the hearing, the documents were NOT AUTHENTICATED, filed, and served more than twenty days before the hearing as required byRules1.510(c), 1.510(e) and Appellee’s failure to abide by these rules also necessitates reversing the order granting summary judgment. Verizzo, 28 So. 3d at 977-78; Mack v. Commercial Indus. Park, Inc., 541 So. 2d 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989).

 

While Bank of America ALLEGED IN ITS UNVERIFIED COMPLAINT THAT IT WAS THE HOLDER OF THE NOTE AND MORTGAGE, the copy of the note attached to the amended complaint CONTRADICTS that allegation. WHEN EXHIBITS ARE ATTACHED TO A COMPLAINT, THE CONTENTS OF THE EXHIBITS CONTROL OVER THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT. Khan v. Bank of America (Fla: Dist. Court of Appeals, 5th Dist. 2011)

 

(See Wright v. Emory, 41 So.3d 290,292(Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (“[An] attorney’s unsworn and unverified statements do not establish competent evidence.”)).

 

In re Leisure Time Sports, Inc. 194 B.R. 859, 861 (9th Cir. 1996) THE HOLDER OF A NOTE HAS STANDING TO SEEK ENFORCEMENT OF THE NOTE, Hunt Ridge at Tall Pines, Inc. v. Hall, 766 So. 2d 399, 401 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000) When exhibits are attached to a complaint, the contents of THE EXHIBITS CONTROL OVER THE ALLEGATIONS OF THE COMPLAINT.

 

When a judicial officer acts entirely without jurisdiction or without compliance with jurisdiction requisites he may be held civilly liable for abuse of process even though his act involved a decision made in good faith, that he had jurisdiction. Little v. U.S. Fidelity& Guaranty Co., 217 Miss. 576, 64 So. 2d 697.

 

ONLY A HOLDER-IN-DUE COURSE CAN GRANT

THE RIGHT OF REDEMPTION.

 

Ala. Code § 7-3-305. Defenses and Claims in Recoupment.

§7-3-305c An obligor is not obliged to pay the instrument if the person seeking enforcement of the instrument does not have rights of a holder in due course and the obligor proves that the instrument is a lost or stolen instrument.

 

     Wells Fargo has not surrendered the instrument, even after the foreclosure auction paid in full the “absent un-possessed” instrument.

Ala. Code § 7-3-501(b)(2) .PRESENTMENT.

§7-3-501(b)(2) Surrender the instrument if full payment is made.

 

     Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Defendant/Appellee has filed NO Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 simply because it SOLD THE ORIGINAL and it no longer has possession. THE HOLDER-IN-DUE COURSE HAS NOT APPEARED. The foreclosure conducted by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. was WRONGFUL. The City of Ozark can purchase private property only through its power exercised in an EMINENT DOMAIN procedure. No title to the property was conveyed to the City of Ozark by Wells Fargo who had no title to convey. Whoever has superior title is owner.

“No title is conveyed through the sale when a party who lacks a right to enforce the note proceeds with foreclosure sale.” Williams, supra. Cited in Holms v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. et al, 43rd Jud. Cir. Ct. Div II, No. 08CN-CV00944 (Jan. 26, 2015).

 

What belongs to us cannot be transferred to another without our consent. But this must be understood with this qualification, that the government may take property for public use, paying the owner its value. The title to property may also be acquired, with the consent of the owner, by JUDGMENT OF A COMPETENT TRIBUNAL. (Maxim of Law)

 

What does not appear and what is not, is the same; it is not the defect of the law, but the WANT OF PROOF. (Maxim of Law)

 

     Purchase by a municipality using an Eminent Domain Procedure cannot be completed without the granted consent of the private property owner. Said protection is embodied in the Fifth Amendment of the U. S. Constitution, as well as language of Art. I, § 23 Eminent Domain, Alabama Constitution 1901 and untold rulings by the SCOTUS and reports citing legal precedence in courts throughout the nation.

     In addition, Judge Clark should be encouraged to allow Haywood Jackson Mizell, Appellant/Plaintiff and his forensic document experts, to examine the 2003 Original pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002, and unseparated, promissory note and mortgage unit contract instruments executed with Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc., Appellee/Defendant in lieu of the alleged certified copy of such promissory note, introduced by reference by the Appellee in pleadings and during hearings in case 26-CV-2013-000006 and in case 26-CV-2019-000008.00 pleadings and at hearing on June 19, 2019. In light of the fact, that document expert affidavits may be able to attest that the alleged certified copy is a computer-generated forgery when compared to the Original pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002.

     This court has jurisdiction for such Writ of Mandamus, as Appellant is merely asking for authentication of a certified copy of a document, which was introduced by reference in pleadings before the courts. This court has jurisdiction to issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction and agreeable to the usages and principles of law pursuant to 28 U.S. C. §1651.

§ 1651. WRITS

(a) The Supreme Court and all courts established by Act of Congress may issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions and agreeable to the usages and principles of law.

(b) An alternative writ or rule nisi may be issued by a justice or judge of a court which has jurisdiction.

 

     Such Mandamus will not represent any harm or undue hardship on Wells Fargo, Appellee, but is of paramount importance and crucial for Mizell/Appellant and for all similar cases throughout the whole nation in light of the fact that the admissibility of fact witness evidence be considered competent and should prevail over hearsay evidence such as un-certified and un-sworn statements of attorney’s copies.

     Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. is currently occupying a fiduciary position as a bank/mortgagee. Integrity of US bankers is about to be undermined yet again. Civil rights and human rights of the U.S. citizens to conduct business with institutions of integrity, as well for due process and redemption rights of the Appellant is about to be taken away yet again without this Honorable Court granting such Writ of Mandamus. Due to the fact, that according to experts, alleged certified copy could be a forgery, and due to the fact, that officials, who released this alleged certified copy, suspected to be uttering a forgery, obstructing   justice and refusing to allow access to the original, and due to concerns of further tampering or destruction of the document in question, appellant respectfully request immediate transportation of the original 2003 promissory note and mortgage that establish standing for claims made by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage and that gain for the court subject-matter jurisdiction, plus the document in question as stored electronically, as well as 2003 microfiche film containing a copy of such scanned record, to secure and fire resistant facility offsite, such as Fort Rucker Army Base until further inspection and expert examination of above documents can be performed.

Memorandum of Points and Authorities

     This Petition for a Writ of Mandamus is based on 28 U.S.C §1651.

 

     Case at hand was filed by Plaintiff. In the other case, during the December 16, 2014 hearing D. Keith Andress, Attorney for Wells Fargo argued that the document he was waiving was the original promissory note that had been converted to a check that was due to be retained by WF and not filed into the court record for examination.

     He argued that due to possession of said original promissory note that any alleged copy of such mortgage document and the relief sought by Mizell cannot be granted and the case then at hand be moot and is FAIT ACCOMPLI.

a thing that has already happened or been decided before those affected hear about it, leaving them with no option but to accept it.

 

     Haywood Jackson Mizell, from first-hand knowledge, observed that the alleged “original” that Andress had waived, to be a crude computer-generated forgery, and not a true and correct copy of the 2003 Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 type written long form promissory and mortgage instrument, allegedly issued to Mr. Andress only after the foreclosure auction of 2013.

     In the current Quiet Title Action, a claim of Res Judicata was stated that justified a Rule 12(B) dismissal order by Judge Clark. NO FINAL JUDGMENT has been issued thus preventing an appeal. Res Judicata claim suggests that the court clerk in that case has the Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 that is necessary in PROOF OF CLAIM of who has the legal title at issue in the action that could DRAW THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. The Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 has never been filed into any case or into Public Record. In fact, an affidavit by a vice president of the Wells Fargo loan department exhibited the fact that Wells Fargo no longer has the Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 that can be filed because Wells Fargo HAD BEEN PAID AND TRANSFERRED ITS INTEREST “WITHOUT RECOURSE”. (See Exhibit page 158)

     The Quiet Title Action case has been dismissed with no ability for appeal, refusing this court examination of the Original pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002, with no original for court comparison, verification of its legitimacy is impossible relative to impact on superior title holder.

     Haywood Jackson Mizell requests an appeal court hearing, arguing that the dismissal order was in error without a court judgment.

"It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error, it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error."  American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 332, 442 (1950).

 

     The original has never been made public anywhere that could support a res judicata argument. Res Judicata gives an address where a Quiet title proof of claim may reside. All res judicata claims favorable to the defendants are based on un-verified copies, not certified Originals pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002. All that a Quiet Title Action asks is that original document in question be made public for its impact on who has superior title holder status.

     A before sale reduced COPY of the above-mentioned long form promissory note and mortgage is so public, that Wells Fargo is profiteering from it by seizing property and by posting the alleged certified copy into court records and selling property without warranty of title.

     The Circuit Court Clerk and the Probate Judge did not respond to the request for any administrative appeal hearing and never allowed inspection of the Original pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002. Haywood Jackson Mizell was told that the Circuit Clerk and the Probate Judge can certify only to what is of record and will not and CANNOT CERTIFY TO THAT WHICH DOES NOT APPEAR.

     Haywood Jackson Mizell sought loan source information that had been filed with the Department of Homeland Security. NO records had even been reported that could confirm that Wells Fargo had ever made said loan. The only report that could identify the source of funds was filed with the Internal Revenue Service and that report was submitted by Wells Fargo Home Mortgage identifying FHLMC (Freddie Mac), shown to be the real lender and that according to a commercial database. This is significant, as a lender, who does not have a valid promissory note and mortgage in their possession has to resort to use of stolen and fraudulently obtained worthless documents whose existence was not reported to the Homeland Security due to its non-existence.

     Without an Original Negotiable Instrument pursuant to FRCP Rule 1002 there is NO VALID CLAIM that can be proven, and the plaintiff is denied protection of EMINENT DOMAIN TRIBUNAL PROCEDURE.

     Haywood Jackson Mizell has a copy of the Andrea Kruse, Vice-President Loan Documentation Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. affidavit showing that the said Wells Fargo Home Mortgage document, the security CUSIP number, was redacted so that the number could not be seen by the public because separation on the note and mortgage would be evident, and that alone rendered the documents null and void. Wells Fargo justified its wrongful foreclosure on an absent obligation instrument even though NOT ENTITLED to the funds. The auction sale was null and void.

Alabama Code Title 35. Property § 35-10-12

Where a power to sell lands is given in any mortgage, the power is part of the security and may be executed by any person, or the personal representative of any person who, by assignment or otherwise, becomes entitled to the money thus secured.

Alabama Code Title 35. Property § 35-10-9

All sales of real estate, made under powers contained in mortgages or deeds of trust contrary to the provisions of this article, shall be null and void, notwithstanding any agreement or stipulation to the contrary.

 

     The legal title is all that is in issue in the Quiet Title Action, and such title, when ascertained, whether in the plaintiff or in the defendant, draws to it the JUDGMENT of the court.

     What is asked of this court is to order the lower court to faithfully perform its duty and make a just judgment of the court based on fact witnesses as to who is holder of Superior Title.

     Evidence rules of the state of Alabama are similar to Federal Rules of Evidence. State of Alabama provides "Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies of excerpts, if the original is not readily available, provided that upon request parties shall be given an opportunity to compare with the original."

     Federal Rule of Evidence 1002 states that "[t]o prove the content of a writing, recording or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress." The Federal Rules of Evidence do indeed provide otherwise. With regard to duplicates and public or official records, the rules state in pertinent part as follows:

A "duplicate" is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original,... or by mechanical or electronic re-recording,... or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original. Federal Rule of Evidence 1001(4). A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (l) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) in the circumstances it would be unfair to admit the duplicate in lieu of the original. Federal Rule of Evidence 1003. (emphasis added)

 

     In violation of its own rules of evidence, as well as federal rules of evidence and Gambles best evidence rule, Kimberly A. Clark, Judge is refusing to allow Haywood Jackson Mizell and his forensic document experts inspection of the original promissory note and mortgage unit in lieu of the alleged certified copy introduced by reference by the Appellee in pleadings and during the June 19, 2019 hearing in above mentioned case.

     Haywood Jackson Mizell, Plaintiff/Appellant raises a genuine question regarding authenticity of alleged certified copy of Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.’s promissory note and mortgage contract with plaintiff.

     This is a case of national importance. It is essential and exigent for this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus ordering Kimberly a. Clark, Judge to allow Haywood Jackson Mizell, and his document experts, inspection of the original type written long form promissory note and mortgage unit with Haywood Jackson Mizell, in order to perform authentication of the alleged certified copy, referenced during the June 19, 2019 hearing.

     Such relief will not prejudice Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as WF has already released the alleged certified copy and inspection of the original cannot be prejudicial.

     There is no hardship on the defendant or Kimberly A. Clark, Judge, as defendant is not required to do anything, and Dale County Circuit Court and Dale County Probate Office routinely allow inspection of records.

     If the requested Writ of Mandamus is not granted, Appellant will be greatly prejudiced, as his case is intimately connected to the “original” certificate in question. Appellees introduced the alleged certified copy as proof of existence of the document in question on file and as basis for their position that the instant case needs to be dismissed. Without access to the original appellant cannot disprove allegations by the Appellees.

American Jurisprudence 2d Volume 25 §19. Strength of own title.

     "A well-established principle which has acquired the force of a maxim is to the effect that a plaintiff in ejectment can recover only on the strength of his own title, and not on the weakness of his adversary's. The defendant is not required to show title in himself, and he may lawfully say to the plaintiff, "Until you show title, you have no right to disturb me." Thus, even against one without title, plaintiff cannot recover in ejectment unless he proves title or prior possession in himself;

 

     The legal title is all that is in issue in the action, and such title, when ascertained, whether in the plaintiff or in the defendant , draws to it THE JUDGMENT OF THE COURT. “Cloud over property” that made the value of the property ZERO and the property UN-MARKETABLE, can be removed. Then City of Ozark can purchase legal title by the exercise its power of Eminent Domain by paying just compensation.

CONCLUSION

     Judge Kimberly A. Clark assigned merit to a non-existent Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. claim that can never be filed as proof into public record.

     On July 23, 2012 RE: Loan Number 708-012850779, I am responding on behalf of Wells Fargo Home Mortgage (WFHM) to your complaint filed with the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).

     Enclosed is a copy of the Note you executed. We are not providing you with the original Note, because WFHM is not subject to USC Title 18, Part1, Chapter 101, Section 2071, as the Note was not deposited or filed with any judicial or public officer of the United States.

 

     Signed by Brooke Bosier, Executive Mortgage Specialist, Office of Executive Complaints, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.

     Letter written August 31, 2012 by Amber Regan Executive Mortgage Specialist, Office of Executive Complaints, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. explains Wells Fargo’s policy RE: 708-0128507779.

     As stated in our prior responses to you WFHM does not disburse original documents. However, WFHM does have a valid loan and lien on this property.

 

     WFHM is consistent in the exercise of its policy. The proof of claim has never been filed into any case, including the instant Quiet Title Action Complaint, because a judge can be easily convinced by the unsworn and unverified statement of the barred attorney who represents WF in court. A sworn pro se presentation of Fact Witnesses is not to be believed. “Robo signers” are replaced by effective statement of attorneys without regard to truth facts. Peonage is re-instated by Wells Fargo, not abolished.

42 U.S. Code § 1994 - Peonage abolished

The holding of any person to service or labor under the system known as peonage is abolished and forever prohibited in any Territory or State of the United States; and all acts, laws, resolutions, orders, regulations, or usages of any Territory or State, which have heretofore established, maintained, or enforced, or by virtue of which any attempt shall hereafter be made to establish, maintain, or enforce, directly or indirectly, the voluntary or involuntary service or labor of any persons as peons, in liquidation of any debt or obligation, or otherwise, are declared null and void.

 

     Once the mortgage fraud is out front and known, it becomes apparent that the homeowner will never own his home property with a legal and unbroken chain of title, the homeowner then will realize that he was and will always be a tenant on his property making payments that will never purchase the home property, then he knows he is an involuntary indentured servant.

     Before the foreclosure auction, a notice of a misprision of felony was hand delivered to Honorable Judge William Filmore, Dale County Circuit Judge. It was ignored.

18 USC § 4 - Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

 

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION

The American Bar Association's opinion concerning foreclosures: Standing and subject-matter-jurisdiction. ……this Court has the responsibility to assure itself that the foreclosure Plaintiffs have standing and that subject-matter-jurisdiction requirements are met at the time the complaint is filed. Even without the concerns raised by the documents the Plaintiffs have filed, there is reason to question the existence of standing and the jurisdictional amount".

 

     In Alabama, the eligible person, H. J. Mizell, who holds legal title to the real estate filed the quiet title action. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. had previously sold its interest in the property and does not have sufficient interest to participate in the Quiet Title Action. All that WF can do is slander the title.

The elements of a slander of title action under Alabama law are: (1) ownership of the property by plaintiff; (2) falsity of the words published; (3) malice of defendant in publishing the statements; (4) publication to some person other than the owner; (5) the publication must be in disparagement of plaintiff's property or the title thereof; and (6) that special damages were the proximate result of such publication. Ala. Code 1975, § 6–5–211. Buckentin v. SunTrust Mortg. Corp., 928 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (N.D. Ala. 2013) (applying Alabama law).

 

     Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. has NO required Mortgage Banker Bond to secure its compliance with the mortgage contract and execute replevin.

"Replevied," used in its technical sense, means delivered to the owner (Steuer v. Maguire, 66 N. E. 706, 707; 182 Mass. 575, 576 (1903) while the words "to replevy" means to recover possession by an action of replevin. (Tillson v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 89870, May 28, 1991, 197 SCRA 587, 598).

 

     NO DEFAULT. A 2012 offer to pay in full was improperly refused. (See EX AFM).

 

     PETITIONER HAS NO REMEDY OTHER THAN THIS COURT MANDAMUS REQUEST. PROOF OF CLAIM MUST BE FILED FOR CONSIDERATION.

     Remedy in Maxim of Law.   In the delivery of writing, not what he said, but what is done is to be considered.

FOR WHAT ITS WORTH

     The real issue always at hand is distilled into one word, CONTROL. In the instant Quiet Title Action, Wells Fargo had sold the loan and was without lien yet took control so that the City of Ozark could take control of the property without an Eminent Domain procedure and appearing to gain control at a small fraction of the property value.

     In 2008, when earnest money had sealed a sale, Wells Fargo sabotaged the sale by reducing the property value to zero and making it unmarketable. Snipers on the roof and other law enforcement personnel were at the foreclosure auction to control the number of bidders, limiting the number to one.

     What do you call it when a bunch of companies colludes to set prices, fix markets, close off competition, capture regulators, and bribe politicians? We call it a cartel, right? Few have heard the term, BANKING CARTEL.

Nelson Rockefeller famously said, “The secret to success is to own nothing, but control everything.”

 

It is against equity to deprive freeman of the free disposal of their own property. Co. Litt. 223. See 1 Bouv. Inst. n. 455, 460.

 

     Big Central bank officials escape 20-year jail sentences because the corporations are considered by congress “too big to fail” even when the officials function as criminals making them what the FBI before congress has labeled as “criminal enterprises”. A multitude of crimes, at a minimum, avoid prosecution under Title 18 §1512(B) alter, destroy, mutilate, or conceal an object with intent to impair the object's integrity or availability for use in an official proceeding;

“Banking was conceived in iniquity and born in sin. Bankers own the earth; take it away from them but leave them with the power to create credit, and, with a flick of the pen, they will create enough money to buy it all back again. Take this power away from them and all great fortunes like mine will disappear, and they ought to disappear, for then this world would be a happier and better world to live in. But if you want to be slaves of bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, then let the bankers control money and control credit.” - Lord Stamp, Director of the Bank of England, 1940.

 

     Slightly over the past decade, the one percent have amassed control of nearly forty-six percent of the nation’s assets up from less than ten percent two decades ago. Will “Proof of Claim” enforced by the Rule of Law prevail? Public officials work for the citizens not the other way around and especially not work for the CARTEL FICTION.

              

                         Respectfully submitted,

 

 

                          

                         ______________________________

                         Haywood Jackson Mizell, pro se

                                                            

         August 6, 2019