Flipping Frenzy.com is your source for news, information, and commentary on Real Estate and Mortgage Fraud. 
If you believe you have been a victim of real estate or mortgage fraud, start here! Select your state from the pulldown menu below:
Update: Edwards vs. U.S. Bank National Assoc.
For those of you following the Edwards’ case, here’s an article from one of our local newspapers (Catherine Kavanaugh reporting for the Daily Tribune):
The eviction hearing for longtime residents Brenda and Terry Edwards was postponed Tuesday so the judge can review a legal brief raising more issues related to their mortgage fraud case. The Edwardses have lived 32 years in a Hilldale Avenue bungalow. They paid it off in 1997, but the couple became tenants in the house last year following a home equity scam.
The Edwardses unknowingly gave away the 79-year-old dwelling when a shady lender slipped sales documents into paperwork the couple thought they were signing for a $10,000 home equity loan. The residents ended up selling their house to the lender’s accomplice who didn’t make any payments and let the property go into foreclosure. It was sold at auction last summer to U.S. Bank National Association for $137,724. The bank wants the couple out, while the Edwardses’ attorney, Scott F. Smith, is asking 44th District Judge Terrence Brennan to set aside the eviction.
“I want to give everyone a full opportunity to present every argument they have,” Brennan said.
While the motion to set aside the eviction is pending in district court, Smith said he will file for a quiet title in Oakland County Circuit Court. This process determines the rights of all parties who are in dispute over a property.
The Edwardses contend they never intended to sell their house. They said they did not receive a penny from the transaction set up by their lender, who allegedly walked away from the deal with at least $33,000 from a forged check cashed in the Edwardses’ name at a Novi bank.
Novi and Royal Oak police as well as the Federal Bureau of Investigation are looking into criminal aspects of the transaction while the property rights issues proceed in district and circuit courts. Friends and neighbors of the Edwardses showed up in court to offer their moral support. The couple’s daughter, Tracy Wallaert, said she appreciates everyone who has encouraging words for her parents.
“I figured people would follow this, but more like gossip as in look what the Edwardses’ are dealing with now,” Wallaert said. “But fortunately they really care. A lot of people think: This could be me. When you take out a loan you feel it’s a secure process.”
The Edwardses needed the home equity loan to pay back taxes. The lender did cover that debt but when it came to finalize how the couple would repay it, other documents, including a two-page warranty deed, were put in front of them to sign.
Ralph Roberts, a mortgage fraud expert, is helping the Edwardses through the legal process, and he said the seven-week postponement on the motion to set aside the eviction is the “second-best thing that could have happened.”
“We can go to the circuit court for other remedies,” he said. “Some parties have clean hands, some don’t. This will take time to sort out.”
I must say, having been present in the courtroom for yesterday morning’s proceedings, Judge Brennan did a really good job, and it was especially nice to see his genuine concern for Brenda and Terry. For my part, I attempted to talk to U.S. Bank National Association’s attorney about setting up a Rent Escrow account for the Edwards’ but they wanted nothing to do with that suggestion.
It’s a shame, really, because all indications are that the Edwards’ will win this battle. They were clearly taken advantage of, and if U.S. Bank National Association was smart, they’d be doing everything within their powers to help–not get in the way of–the Edwards reclaiming their property.
A Ralph Roberts Site, Copyright 2005-2008 |
Your car is stolen! You first report it to the legal authorties, the thief who stole it sells it to an unknowing buyer. This person who now has your car is a proven 3rd party,. they really didn’t know it was stolen! Do they get to keep your car to even resell if they choose? or legally does the buyer have to render the “hot” goods to the original owner? Wouldn’t that buyer then have the right to force legal action on the person they purchased the stolen car from?
Comment by Tracie Wullaert — July 27, 2007 @ 7:45 pm
Well the bank did get in the way of the Edwards getting their home and they are now evicting them. Tracie is right but what we are dealing with is called REVERSE ENGINEERING OF THE LAW to benefit whoever has the most connections and money.
Here is the register of actions for the Edwards case that is very similar to my case where the judge ruled that the scammed party had no rights to their home that was literally stolen from them.
Notice that towards the end of the register of actions, the trial was set for 9/17/07. The Edwards were denied that trial because Judge Colleen O’Brien in her ‘opinion’ ruled prior to any trial in favor of the deep-pocketed bank.
The Edwards were denied fraud claims even being entered in this case against Aguilar making it impossible for them to prevail.
I was denied the same fraud claims to be admitted in my case but I thought that was because the perpetrators in my case are related to Chief Judge Antonio Viviano. Even under oath and in depositions when the criminals in my case ADMITTED they committed massive fraud, Judge Mary Chrzanowski ruled that if she held them responsible the ‘case would explode’. That really was said and they really did take my home through massive fraud. When the court rules that fraud is not allowed as a claim for damages, the court is saying that the criminals did nothing wrong and therefore the Edwards cannot collect any damages.
This is not legal advice but it is the route in which we should have taken to stay in our house longer. The Edwards attorney, Mr. Scott Smith, should file an appeal and file to Stay the Eviction pending the outcome. The bank may be more willing to work with them at this point as the appeal could take a year and a half or so. Mr. Smith should raise the questions of:
Were the Edwards due process rights and the Fifth Amendment violated for denial of a fair trial by a jury of their peers?
And: Did the trial court err in not allowing the Fraud claims to be added as a count against the Defendant Aguilar?
With a jury and the fraud claims, the Edwards would have been very triumphant especially with a sympathetic jury. I am sure they would have Quiet Title to their home and damages awarded to them. But the court is not set up that way. It is a system that is morally bankrupt as proven in these cases. Case No: 05-001136-CH Macomb County Circuit Court and
Case Number 2006-072665-CZ EDWARDS TERRY vs. AGUILAR GUSTAVO Oakland County Circuit Court.
Judge Name COLLEEN A. O’BRIEN
Case Filed 02/23/2006
Case Disposed 04/25/2007
Register of Actions View Parties New Search
Date Code Description
02/23/2006 C COMPLAINT FILED /JURY DEMAND Order Document
02/23/2006 SI SUMMONS ISSUED Order Document
03/24/2006 CRC CROSS FILED LASALLE BANK MIDWEST/CLAIM Order Document
03/24/2006 ATC ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FILED LASALLE BANK MIDWEST/AFM Order Document
************
04/09/2007 PTH PRE-TRIAL HELD
04/10/2007 APR DATE SET FOR TRIAL ON 09172007 08 30 AM Y
04/13/2007 CCT#2808 FUNDS DEPOSITED BY BRENDA EDWARDS/SB
04/25/2007 FDO FINAL DISPOSITION-OPINION
04/25/2007 OI OPINION ISSUED RE SD MOTIONS TO QT/UE/FRAUD
04/25/2007 OTH DM TO QUIET TITLE-GRTD
04/25/2007 OTH M TO QUIET TITLE-DENIED
04/25/2007 OTH DM FOR UNJUST ENRICHMENT-GRTD
04/25/2007 OTH DM FRAUD CLAIMS-DENIED
04/26/2007 OPN OPINION FILED & ORD Order Document
05/11/2007 CCT#2933 FUNDS DEPOSITED BY TERRY EDWARDS
05/11/2007 ORD ORDER FILED GRNT MTN FOR SD Order Document
05/11/2007 NTC NOTICE FILED OF ENTRY OF ORD Order Document
05/16/2007 POS AFFIDAVIT/PROOF OF SERVICE FILED Order Document
05/23/2007 MPR MOTION PRAECIPE FILED FOR 05302007
05/23/2007 BRF BRIEF FILED DFT/SUPPT MTN CASE EVAL/POS Order Document
05/23/2007 MTN MOTION FILED DFT/FOR CASE EVAL SANCTIONS Order Document
05/23/2007 NOH NOTICE OF HEARING FILED Order Document
06/04/2007 MPR MOTION PRAECIPE FILED FOR 06132007
06/05/2007 NOH NOTICE OF HEARING FILED Order Document
06/08/2007 CCT#3050 FUNDS DEPOSITED BY BRENDA EDWARDS/SB
06/12/2007 BRF BRIEF FILED PLF/IN OPPOS TO MTN FOR CASE EVAL Order Document
06/13/2007 M MOTION FOR CE SANCTIONS TUA
07/16/2007 CCT#3211 FUNDS DEPOSITED BY TERRY EDWARDS/SB
The public should be outraged. The Edwards were making monthly payments and they still lost their home?
Did the judge rule that this Aguilar be held at all responsible? No. As an appearance of impropriety the Judge just basically gave the Edwards’ home to the bank. In essence, the court is saying that the only wrong-doing came from the Edwards because they hadn’t thoroughly read through their mortgage documents while being scammed. IT IS OUTRAGEOUS!!!
Comment by another victim — July 29, 2007 @ 9:20 am
This is news to me, I was never told Aguilar was not going to be held accountable. Mr. Smith told me there were only 2 Co.’s the judge gave ruling in their favor. As of now the bank has accepted an offer to let us by back our house. Thus far we feel Scott Smith and Ralph Roberts have done a wonderful job helping my family asking for NOTHING in return! Consider, we have been fighting this for 1 yr and we’re still at home.
Comment by BrendaEdwards — July 29, 2007 @ 6:05 pm
Dear Brenda:
That is great news that you will be able to stay in your home. And I am glad that Ralph and Scott helped you. But I am not understanding why you were not granted the right to go to trial and awarded appropriate damages. I mean they offered us the same deal to buy the house back at a price way more than we should have had to pay.
Why should you be buying your house back (and at what cost?) when you were scammed out of it?
How is Aguilar going to be held responsible? From the AG’s office?
Please explain if there is a chance for restitution for you and if not, how you feel OK about having to start over by repurchasing your home that was already paid off?
Comment by another victim — July 30, 2007 @ 7:05 am
Now I found out that there is an order for $4,000 + to be awarded to the Title company and the Insurance company AGAINST the Edwards. How is that possible?
You have to ask how can you be responsible for the Title company and the insurance company to be negligent in this transaction?
This is absolutely insane.
And is the Attorney General doing anything in this case?
Comment by another victim — November 1, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
I am dealing with US Bank right now in a….I’ll just say it….a foreclosure scam (though everything will soon be in the hands of a federal judge). If the Edwards’ look closely enough, they might possibly find that the stupid bank was behind this whole mess all along. US Bank is NOT in business to help people! US Bank is NOT anyone’s friend! US Bank is NOT to be trusted! I hope Mr. and Mrs. Edwards OWN that bank when this is all over!
Comment by Scott Clem — August 2, 2008 @ 12:17 pm
I am dealing with US Bank right now and trying to save or home form forecloser…I just don’t know who to trust anymore…we talk to so many different people per day….and everyone tell you something different….we need help !!!!I think something it going wrong behind or back…..
Commenty Brenda Anderson
I don’t know who to contact at usbank that I can trust.
Comment by om & Brenda Anderson — September 3, 2009 @ 4:14 pm