About the author

Erick Erickson

View all posts

1 Comment

  • Washington Mutual acquired Homeside Lending and admitted to four year’s concealment of two 2001 loan payment misapplication’s that forced Bankruptcy to become the substance of Core Adversary law suit, prior to July 2008 Foreclosure.

    Washington Mutual called for witness their loan manager that for four years concealed loan originator Bank One 2001 last action before loan transfer, explained by Executive Response Center as Principal Curtailment!

    Loan Manager Testified Principal Curtailments are loan originator common practice today, despite being disallowed by DEEDS Contractual Preemptive Clause Stipulation with exacted damage’s and Right’s granted by the forward Clause of First Constitutional Amendment [SCIENTER = Science of Loan] where-by DEED states prepayments require Signature Authorization to forbid loan managers deceitful action of shading payment entry box {Void of digits}to formulate lack of accountability by inclusion in Credit Repository Report blocking all attempts at outside refinance, forcing Bankruptcy protection to allow loan History concealment with False I.R.S 1098 Form production!

    Washington Mutual loan manager testified to detailing and supervising Homeside Lending 2001 first after loan transfer action, explained by Executive Response Center as the erroneous November 2001 Escrow Reduction, justifying action to Judge as intended for anticipated December 2001 payment, without support, substance or documentation and historically disputed repeatedly by all real-time loan history statements lack of December 2001 entry, loan manager claimed real-time loan Histories’ and Escrow Summaries’ report inaccurately against Executive Response Centers admittances!

    Loan Manager Testified Reductions of Escrow are common lender practice today, despite Executive Response Centers formal admittance letter’s statement that the Escrow misapplication was erroneous, in actuality theft to allow and conceal original theft that evolved to envelope fictitious Credit Repositories Report with I.R.S. 1098 Tax form deception, that proved to first require release of Bankruptcy Stay and documentation transfer to Washington Mutual’s Chicago archive’ department, before loan history production, that required first the release of Bankruptcy STAY, despite Judge order of loan History production at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, including numerous Attorney and R.E.S.P.A. requests.

    Washington Mutual Executive Response Center replied by reporting the Escrow Misapplication was an erroneous attempt at Principal Curtailment reversal and admitted Loan started in 2001 and all 2001 Loan Payments were timely paid to Bank One, including the first Three Payments timely paid to Homeside Lending in 2002, until the Lender created 12 Term Escrow shortage of $100.00 Payment demand instigated insolvency, forwarded by Homeside Lending fictitious 1098 tax form deception that claimed Escrow reduction as Payment Taxable!

    Washington Mutual sent letter stating their intention to quickly resolve by replying to R.E.S.P.A. “Qualified Written Request” with belated loan history production, but suddenly released Bankruptcy STAY prematurely, with Executive Response Center notation of the Comptroller of the Currency, Better Business Bureau and my Bankruptcy Attorneys involvement requesting production of loan history resolve.

    The Better Business Bureau reported to suspend Washington Mutual’s arbitrator seat and membership for three Years for intentionally delaying to allow first the release Bankruptcy STAY before supplying admittance statement of Principal Curtailment and Escrow Misapplication, coupled with Washington Mutual’s failure to timely respond the Better Business Bureau who helped by forcing Washington Mutual loan archive department to release the four year concealed loan history, on the day following their release of Bankruptcy STAY infraction.

    1. Webster defines Prepayment as required understanding {DEED Contract stated Signed Authorization} and Curtailment requires persistent covert deception, include the capturing of the erroneous Escrow Misapplications damage doubling action.
    2. Both misapplied payments were coveted from loan history despite Judge’s order of “Proof of Claim” clarification with set time-frame at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing, the Funds Possession remain to be harbored today protecting Lender from Contractual damages exposure, falsifying Reports to Credit Repositories including Tax Form 1098 and the accrued Interest payment.
    3. Ignoring Judge’s time-framed Order, Bankruptcy Attorney abandoned all Houston, Texas caseload and moved practice to San Antonio, Texas.
    4. New Board Certified Bankruptcy Attorney posted R.E S.P.A. “qualified written request” but post-dated it prior to our first encounter {Judge ruled inadmissible!}
    5. My layperson R.E.S.P.A. “Qualified Written Request” was ignored to first allow release of Bankruptcy STAY. but admitted into evidence at Core Adversary and received $1,000.00 Award, but the $1,500.00 misapplication funds remain lost, including accrued Interest and forwarded Damages “Qualified Written Request” remains without lender line-item response, but it did receive the minimal damage for being ignored, as were Pretrial discovery Questions.
    6. The Comptroller of the Currency and Better Business Bureau request for clarity was intentionally ignored to allow first the Bankruptcy release of STAY progression, then Washington Mutual admitted lender committed Principal Curtailment error before loan transfer and that after receiving loan new lender misapplied Escrow in erroneous Loan repair attempt {Escrow Misapplication was reported I.R.S. taxable, evidencing 2001 awareness and intentional false Credit Repository reporting {December 2001 payment received shaded blank box without entry of digits} all in the R.E.S.P.A. protected “60 day loan transfer time-frame.”
    7. Judge without exposing Appeal time-frame to Attorney {after the long 100 days following Core Adversary Trial, posted Judgment by common postal carrier coveting the allowance of 10 day appeal time-frame, to seek, convince and hire New Appellate Attorney, that chose to retain trial Bankruptcy Attorney for council.} Judgment misquoted with Plagiarism DEED commitment contract {The Substance of Case / Hearing / Lawsuit}that proved to only circumvent the founding father’s first clause of “FIRST AMENDMENT to the Constitution” that contracts must be honored by the corporation that offers the contract, specifically DEED specifies the exact damages that were sought in Core Adversary Trial, but Judgment misquoted {by abbreviation} altering to Plagiarize written substance of preemptive clause in Deed of Trust to allow only the $1,000.00 damage for ignoring R.E.S.P.A. Qualified Written Request award.
    8. Judge penalized Judgment errantly notating forced Bankruptcy is Voluntary, despite being ignored when ordering production of Proof of Claim clarification {Judge Ordered second Proof of Claim, and was Attorney ignored, but stated that core adversary was avenue to pursue if Attorney refuses duty on the recorded record at Bankruptcy Conformation Hearing.} Bankruptcy was forced and Bankruptcy STAY was released and Judge ignored Congressional RULE 2005 additional appeal time-frame of Five days, all outside my power.
    9. Appeal was denied by Judge {beyond allocated 10 day}Circumventing Bankruptcy “5 additional day” appeal time Congressional “RULE” Appeal’s filing was speedy under the circumstances, but ruled day late without merit, and required tallying Sunday’s as day’s missed.
    10. Appellate Attorney appealed and appealed to fifth circuit then allowed time-frame to post Brief to Printer for U.S. Supreme Court expire to advance out of hand protection to Trial Attorney and Judge while refusing to verse merits in Briefs arguing only excusable Neglect.
    11. Fact’s be they understood, Washington Mutual lobbies Texas by reimbursing half of all court appointed Attorney fee charges, this is common knowledge to Texas Attorneys and Judges and in exchange Washington Mutual receives what amounts to immunity.